Report of the

APRU-IRIDeS
Multi-Hazards Program
2015 Summer School

Association of Pacific Rim Universities

Report of the APRU-IRIDeS Multi-Hazards Program
2015 Summer School

21-24 July 2015
Tohoku University
Sendai, Japan

IRIDeS, Tohoku University
International and Domestic Liaison Office468-1-S302 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai
980-8579 Japan
www. irides.tohoku.ac.jp/

The APRU Secretariat
NUS Shaw Foundation Alumni House, 2F
11 Kent Ridge Drive, Singapore 119244
www.apru.org

Edited by
Takako Izumi (International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Yuko Sato (I International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Akiko Yamada (International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Yoko Tani (International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Yuzumi Sato (International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)
Yuriko Kikuchi (International and Domestic Liaison Office, IRIDeS, Tohoku University)

2

CONTENTS● Background....................................................................................................................... 5● Acknowledgement............................................................................................................. 7● Opening remarks.............................................................................................................. 9● Presentations..................................................................................................................... 15● Group work discussions................................................................................................... 41● Field trip............................................................................................................................ 49
Annex I..................................................................................................................................... 56
Annex II................................................................................................................................... 58

3

Background

BackgroundThe 3rd APRU Multi-Hazards Summer School was held at Tohoku University on 21-24 July
2015. More than 40 participants from 10 countries participated in the event to learn thelessons-learnt and experience from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
and discuss the role of universities to implement the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction adopted at the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (UNWCDRR)
held in Sendai in March 2015.
The Association of Pacific Rim Universities (APRU) and the International ResearchInstitute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) in Tohoku University launched the APRU-IRIDeS
Multi-Hazards (MH) Program in April 2013. The Pacific Rim region has high risks tonatural disasters and the universities and research institutes in the region are expected
to contribute to reducing disaster vulnerability and risks and strengthening disastermanagement capacity to tackle these challenges. The Program aims to harness thecollective capabilities of APRU universities for cutting-edge research on disaster risk
reduction (DRR) as well as contribute to international policy making processes on DRR.
The Summer School is one of the key activities under the MH Program.
APRU is a network of 45 premier research universities from 16 economics aroundthe Pacific Rim. Currently, APRU members together have around two million students,
120,000 faculty members and research capabilities related to the key challenges facing
the region. APRU seeks to advance the aspirations of its members and contribute to
global society by: 1. Shaping Asia-Pacific Higher Education and Research; 2. Creating
Asia-Pacific Global Leaders; and 3. Partnering on Solutions to Asia-Pacific Challenges.
IRIDeS in Tohoku University was established in April 2012 as a new integrated
interdisciplinary research team. Together with collaborating organizations from many
countries and with broad areas of specializations, IRIDeS conducts world leading researchon natural disaster science and disaster mitigation leaning from and building upon pastlessons in disaster management from Japan and around the world. Throughout, IRIDeS
will contribute to on-going recovery/reconstruction efforts in the affected areas, conducting
action oriented research, and pursuing effective disaster management to build sustainable
and resilient societies. IRIDeS also provides secretariat services as the regional program
hub to the MH Program.
The key activities of the MH Program include:◦ Organization of the annual summer school◦ Organization of the annual APRU MH Symposium◦ Foster collaboration in disaster research and information/data sharing between APRU
universities5◦ Contribute to DRR discussions at international and regional levels and to a policy
making process.
At the occasion of the UNWCDRR, the APRU Multi-Hazards (MH) Program organized
one of the Public Forum sessions titled “Science and Practical Disaster Risk Reduction(DRR) ~ Role of Universities and Academia in DRR ~” on 17 March 2015. More than 20
speakers were invited to the session from universities, UN agencies, the private sector,
NGOs as well as a government agency such as NASA and nearly 100 audience joined
the session. It consisted of 3 sessions: Bridging the gap between science and practice,
How can science and technology contribute to practical DRR?, and Role of social sciencein DRR. Furthermore, the MH Program has initiated the campus safety survey among
the APRU members and addressed the challenges and strengths. As a follow-up of thesurvey, the MH Program plans to organize the campus safety workshop to strengthen thedisaster preparedness capacity of the APRU member universities.
It has been decided that Tohoku University will host the secretariat of the MH Programfor another 3 years. The MH Program will continue hosting the Summer School, advocate
the need and importance of the campus safety as well as contribute to decision making
and policy development processes to play an important role of science and technology in
DRR.

6ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

IRIDeS as the main organizer of this summer school would like to extend a sincere appreciation to theparticipants and speakers from different sectors who shared wonderful experiences and knowledge
regarding DRR issues from different perspectives. Their involvement and participation made a great
Acknowledgement

contribution to the success of this event. In addition, IRIDeS received tremendous support from the
APRU secretariat based in Singapore as well as Tohoku University. The organizer is also gratefulfor valuable suggestions and advices provided by the faculty members of IRIDeS on the program
development and planning.
Lastly but not least, this summer school was never implemented without hard works andconsiderable support by the International Exchange Division of Tohoku University, the Administrative
Office of IRIDeS, and the International Regional Cooperation Office of IRIDeS.

7

Prof. Susumu Satomi
President of Tohoku University

It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you to Tohoku University for “APRU-IRIDeS MultiHazards Summer School Program”. I am pleased to meet all of you who gathered fromvarious countries for this event.
It has been already 4 years since the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami
happened on March 11, 2011. It was the largest disaster event in Japan after the WorldWar II. Due to the warm support from all over the world, the recovery efforts have greatly
progressed. Tohoku University has been also playing an important role in the recovery
process by providing technical support. You will visit Tagajo city and Higashi-Matsushima
City on 23 July and can see their recovery works. I hope this summer school will give youan opportunity to consider and discuss what we can do to strengthen the disaster risk
reduction capacity.
The establishment of the International Research Institute of Disaster Science(IRIDeS) under Tohoku University is one of our commitments to share our knowledge
and experiences globally. IRIDeS also launched the Multi-Hazards Program together
with APRU in April 2013. Since then, IRIDeS became the program hub and coordinates
the program activities. This summer school is one of the major events under the MultiHazards Program.
We are living in a disaster prone region. Very recently, Nepal was hit by a large
earthquake and nearly 9000 (nine thousand) people lost their lives. We are facing tovarious disaster risks and have to tackle these issues together. I hope that you willcontribute what you have learned back to society as disaster and disaster risk reduction
experts in the future.
In March 2015, the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction was heldin Sendai. More than 10,000 (ten thousand) people participated in this event. Tohoku
University made significant contributions to this Conference by participating in its
preparation and organizing many events. At the end of the Conference, “the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction” was adopted. It will be a guideline for the
implementation of disaster risk reduction in the next 15 years. I expect that you will
discuss universities’ role and contribution in its implementation process during thisSummer School.
To conclude, I would like to thank the APRU secretariat for their kind support andcooperation. I wish you every success for this summer school program. Thank you.

10Dr. Christopher Tremewan
Secretary General, the APRU secretariat

Good morning everybody. Greetings to President Satomi, Vice President Ueki, and othercolleagues and friends from Tohoku University. Welcome to the participants, faculty, andstudents from around the Asia Pacific region. My privilege is Secretary General of APRU
to join President Satomi and welcoming you here to this program to express my best
wishes to you for a very exciting event.
For those of you who are not very familiar with APRU, allow me to offer a brief
introduction APRU was established in 1997 by four university presidents in California:
Opening remarks

the presidents of UCLA, Barkley, Cal Tech, and USC. These presidents were observing
the integration of the Asia Pacific region, the formation of APEC, and the ways in whichgovernments come together to talk about big challenges in the region. The presidents
felt that research universities should be coming together to play a role in advising
governments regarding big science and significant challenges in the region, and to
conduct research that may contribute to solving those challenges. Currently, APRU iscomprised of 45 leading research universities all around the Pacific Rim. In addition, we
have 17 out of the 24 APEC economy representatives included in our membership. In
addition, we have over two million students and over 140,000 faculty members in our
network. It is such a diverse on every region, and one of the things you will notice is not
only the economic ties within the region, but also the collaboration and support provided,
especially after the experience of the 2011 disaster. We are all on the Pacific ring of fire,
and it is a very interesting place to live, albeit quite a risky one.
Acknowledging this challenge, we are very pleased to have developed a partnershipwith Tohoku University about three years ago by creating a program hub on multihazards with the International Research Institute of Disaster Science. The Multi-Hazards
Program has thus far been very actively organized, and this summer program is one very
good example of this collaboration. I can assure you that this is a thoroughly worthwhile
program, and this will be especially evident when you observe the areas around thedisaster zone and what has been happening since the disaster. The Program also
developed many reports and statements, and a great amount of work has contributed
to international entities and regional processes. For example, the Program recently
contributed to the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, as well as the Asian
Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, the APEC emergency preparedness
working group, and integrated research on disaster risk. These are the some of the areason which other programs active through our colleagues here.
We have also conducted a survey of safety preparedness of our own campuses
or businesses through the hub program, and we look forward to developing these in

11

future. This is an excellent example of collaboration across our network. I must thank the
Chairman of the core group, Prof. Yuichi Ono, as well as the Program Coordinator, Dr.
Takako Izumi for their hard work and success.
We look forward to developing this program even more, and I encourage you all tocontribute by offering up suggestions on how this program should develop. Thank you
again for the hosts, and to all of you for coming to this program. I wish you all the best
during your participation and discussions during this event.
Thank you so much.

12

Prof. Fumihiko Imamura
Director / Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

Good morning everybody, and greetings to Dr. Tremewan, Secretary General of the
APRU, President Satomi, and the participants. Welcome to Tohoku University and to
Sendai. Thank you for joining the APRU-IRIDeS Multi-Hazards Summer School. The
Summer School will start today, and you will have a three-day session and a field visit to
Higashi-Matsushima City and Tagajo City, both of which were affected by the Great East
Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in 2011. Through this program, you will learn the recovery
process in these cities.
Opening remarks

I am Fumihiko Imamura, Director of the International Research Institute of Disaster
Science (IRIDeS), Tohoku University, and Professor of the Tsunami Engineering
Laboratory. This new IRIDeS building at the new Aobayama campus was completed in
November of last year. This enabled the researchers and students that were spread out
across the several campuses to gather in a single place to conduct extensive research.
This five-story building has been built with concrete and a seismic isolation system toreinforce against frequent earthquakes. In addition, the building is equipped with a 42hour emergency power generator. Given these fortifications, we believe it is very safe.
Following the catastrophic earthquake and tsunami disaster of 2011, Tohoku University
founded the IRIDeS in 2013. This institute is comprised of scholars from thirty-eight fieldsof seven divisions from the humanities and natural sciences to contribute to the multidisciplinary and multi-layered researches and approaches in disaster management. This
year’s summer school has two purposes. The first is to learn from the experience andrecovery process of the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. The second
purpose is to understand the mechanism of the international disaster risk reduction(DRR) strategy through the Sendai framework, which was adopted at the 2015 UN World
Conference on DRR held in Sendai in March. The presentations in this course include
lessons learned from the 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami by the IRIDeS faculty members,
recovery efforts by the private sector and local governments, lectures from guest
speakers, and group works and discussions to discuss disaster education and the newinternational DRR framework.
The summer school program is the one of major activities for the APRU-IRIDeS MultiHazards Program established in April 2013. The IRIDeS of Tohoku University coordinates
the Program and its activities as the regional program hub. The objectives of the Program
are to harness the collaborative capacities of the IRIDeS and APRU universities for
cutting-edge research on DRR and recovery, to share strategies to cope with campus
disaster risk management, and to contribute to the international policy-making process
on DRR. The Campus Safety Report is one of our outputs from the Program. During the13

2014 summer school, participants discussed the role of universities to strengthen thedisaster preparedness capacity. The first summer school was organized in July 2013, andmore than thirty participants from thirteen APRU member universities participated.
I hope you enjoy the lectures, the field visit, and the discussions in the next four days.
Thank you very much.

14

Interdisciplinary Research in the International
Research Institute of Disaster Science(IRIDeS), Tohoku University
Makoto Okumura
Deputy Director / Professor,
IRIDeS, Tohoku University

The IRIDeS was established in 2012, one year after the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami(GEJET), in order to share the experience and lessons learnt from the disaster. In Japan, there arethree disaster institutes under major universities. Such institutes are normally established after a big
disaster. One of the focuses of the IRIDeS is to prepare for high-risk and low-frequency disasters.
How should we manage and tackle these disasters? To address this question, it is important tounderstand the mechanisms and strategies regarding hazards, exposure, vulnerability, and resilience.
First, to reduce vulnerability, it is crucial to build facilities that are physically strong (i.e., with ananti-seismic structure). The second strategy is to decrease exposure by utilizing land-use control.
Thirdly, by increasing good preparedness capacity among communities such as through effective
response mechanisms and the purchasing of disaster insurance, it is possible to significantly increase
community resilience and recovery rates. The combination of these strategies is required, and can
reduce disaster risks.
The key concept of disaster management comprises hard exposure, vulnerability, and resilience.
The interaction between natural hazards and human behavior results in exposure, whereas
vulnerability stems from weakness in the human social system. Further, resilience implies the speedof recovery. Engineering can decrease vulnerability and improve disaster prevention by building
facilities to reduce the damage and effects of the initial impact. To decrease exposure, land-use control
and temporal pre-disaster evacuation are useful tactics, and thus support from social science andurban planning is extremely crucial. To increase resilience, it is necessary to strengthen the disaster
response capacity and to establish insurance and special finance arrangements.
In order to implement interdisciplinary approaches and research, IRIDeS holds seven divisions andthirty-seven research areas that cover broad areas of disaster science, including Hazards and Risk
Evaluation, Disaster Information Management and Public Collaboration, Disaster Medical Science, theEndowed Research Division, Regional and Urban Reconstruction, Disaster Science, and Human andSocial Response.
The projects and researches that IRIDeS have been conducting include the Michinoku
Shinrokuden, a collaborative archive project made up of 120 organizations from industry, government,
academia, and the private sector. Its purpose is to document images of the GEJET as it occurred. In
addition, the Kakeagare Japan aims to establish and instill proper evacuation behaviors in preparation
for a tsunami while tackling regional problems based on the lessons learned from GEJET. Further,tsunami evacuation drill programs are being planned and implemented in collaboration with various
stakeholders.
The IRIDeS has been also contributing to higher education in disaster management. Tohoku
University established the Inter-graduate School Doctoral Degree Program on Science of Global
Safety with support from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).

16

The Program collaborates with different graduate schools such as Science, Engineering and Arts,
as well as the IRIDeS, and aims to train internationally prominent researchers in the field of disastermanagement.

Presentations

17

New International Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction
Yuichi Ono
Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

There are many ways to understand the importance of disaster risk reduction (DRR). There has been
an international movement to promote DRR, because once a disaster happens, it is too late to save
lives and property. Therefore, there has been a paradigm shift to reduce disaster risks since a few
decades ago.
In the 1970 East Pakistan Cyclone, approximately 0.5 million people were killed. It became
known as one of the world’s largest disasters. Since the Pakistan/Bangladesh Tragedy was so huge,international agencies came to think seriously about disasters. The span between 1990 and 1999 wasestablished as the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) with a secretariat for aten-year term. In 1994, Japan hosted the first World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Yokohama.
The outcome was called the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action, the first internationally agreed
strategy to call for disaster reduction. In 2000, the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR)
was established. In 2005, Japan hosted a second World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Kobe,
which created the Hyogo Framework for Action. Japan hosted a third World Conference on Disaster
Risk Reduction in 2015 in Sendai. The word “risk” was added as new concepts were brought forward,
such as the reduction of potential risks by raising capacity, the implementation of early warning
systems, and the establishment of education programs. The outcome, the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR), refined the framework and targets of the former Hyogo Framework
for Action. The SFDRR was adopted by 187 countries, and will be effective for the next 15 years.
The important points are the seven targets and four priorities for action. The SFDRR mentions “new”
disaster risks, referring to technological, climate change, and exposure (urbanization) components thatare not included in the former framework.
Where is science in the SFDRR? In some countries, there is no dialogue between scientists andpolicy-makers. Science must act as a substantial basis for policy- and decision-making. Tohoku
University communicated this message very strongly to the Japanese government and the international
negotiating process. As a consequence, the importance of academia and the interface between policy
and science has been mentioned numerous times in the SFDRR.
Finally, Tohoku University will commit to the SFDRR through establishing the Global Centre forDisaster Statistics with UNDP in April this year. The role of this organization is to collect and analyze
data, and to provide feedback to governments. There is no such mechanism yet in the world, so weare committed to assisting the SFDRR in this way. Further, we also plan to organize an international
forum on DRR in Sendai beginning in 2017. Working with other international organizations, we wantSendai to continue to hold this sort of multi-stakeholder forum to discuss the future of DRR.

18

Presentations

19

The Roles of Archives and Memorialization in
Disaster Risk Reduction
Sébastien Penmellen Boret
Assistant Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

Drawing from his anthropological research and archival activities, Dr. Boret examined the potential
roles of digital archives and memorials, or what he referred to as ‘living memory’, in Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRR). Whether natural or man-made, the traumatic experiences of disasters often call forspaces, places and objects of memory. Memorial ceremonies, monuments, gardens, storytelling, andmuseums are all tangible and intangible forms of remembering disasters and their victims. Althoughless common, disaster archives which conserve the records (texts, photographs, objects and so on) of
catastrophes may also greatly contribute to the ways in which societies remember disasters. Based on
his research on archives and memorials of the Great East Japan Disaster (2011), Boret’s presentation
was a first attempt to bring these complementary elements of our living memory of disasters to startunderstanding their potential benefit for disaster risk reduction.
Part I – Archiving Disasters: The Michinoku Shinrokuden Project
The first part of his lecture discussed the concepts held by one of the most innovative and ambitious
digital archives project. Recognizing the potential value of disaster archiving, Tohoku University
created a digital archive of the Great East Japan Disaster, namely The Michinoku Shinrokuden Project(2012). Currently a member of its research team, Boret explained that its multi-layered mission is,
not only to collect a vast and comprehensive amount of knowledge related to the Great East Japan
Disaster, but also enhance disaster prevention and mitigation within and outside Japan throughknowledge exchange and educational activities, and as such contribute to DRR.
Part II – Memorializing Disasters: The Great East Japan Disaster
The second part of his presentation concerned his own object of research, the memorialization ofdisasters. In addition to digital archives, another component of a society’s broad memory of disasters
relating to disaster risk reduction (DRR) is disaster memorialization. Boret explained that heunderstands memorialization as any process that may contribute to the preservation of memory of acatastrophe and their victims through any tangible and intangible acts of remembrance, such as private
and public ceremonies, secular and religious memorial monuments and sites, storytelling and informal
and formal disaster education. The recording and analysis of these processes of memorialization
has also become central to the activities of the Michinoku Shinrokuden Project. Its leaders believe
that, together with archiving, memorialization form the necessary basis for any society to remember
a disaster and its victims, appease the trauma of its survivors, contribute to the reconstruction of its
communities and prepare for and protect itself and its vulnerable populations from future disasters.
To conclude his presentation, Boret emphasized that disaster memorialization, in addition to serving

20

the need of the affected population, must be understood in direct relationship with disaster archives inorder to help sharing the memory of and the lessons learned from disasters necessary for DRR at the
local and global level.

Presentations

21

Overview of the APRU Multi-Hazards
Program
Takako Izumi
Associate Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University / APRU Multi-Hazards
Program Coordinator

The APRU Multi-Hazards (MH) Program was launched in April 2013 by the International
Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS), Tohoku University, and the Association ofPacific Rim Universities (APRU). IRIDeS provides administrative services as the regional
program hub for the MH Program. The Pacific Rim region is subject to a high risk of natural
disasters, and the universities and research institutions in the region are expected to play arole in reducing disaster vulnerability and strengthening disaster management capacity. The
main objectives of this program are to harness the collective capabilities of APRU universities
for cutting-edge research on disaster risk reduction (DRR) and to contribute to international
policymaking processes to steadily improve DRR.
Activities of the MH Program include the following:◦ A n annual Multi-Hazards Summer School, to share the lessons learned from severe
disasters and to contribute to the development of regional disaster experts;◦ Supporting the organization of the annual Research Symposium on Multi-Hazards;◦ C onducting collaborative research and sharing results and data among the APRU
institutions;◦ C ontributing to discussions and to international and regional DRR decision-making
processes; and◦ Promoting natural disaster preparedness capacity on university campuses by conducting asurvey on campus safety and publishing the outcomes.
The summer school, one of the major activities of the MH program, started in 2013 and has
been held for the last three years. It aims to share the experiences and lessons learned fromthe Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami and to foster discussions on the challenges andissues that scholars are facing in DRR research and implementation. More than 40 students andfaculty members, mainly from the APRU member universities, participate each year.
In 2014, the MH Program conducted a survey of the APRU member universities to identify
the current status of and the challenges involved in implementing campus safety. The results not
only revealed that the universities have developed many good campus safety initiatives but alsothat various elements still need to be strengthened. To support the universities in developing andimplementing campus safety plans, the MH Program intends to organize a workshop to discuss
the relevant challenges and how to overcome them, share implementation experiences, andlearn more about how to develop tools and systems. The MH Program considers strengthening
preparedness capacity to be a leading responsibility of the universities so that they canprotect the lives of students, faculty, and staff, the universities’ assets, and their accumulated22

knowledge.
In March 2015, the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction (UNWCDRR) was held in
Sendai, Japan. The MH program organized a public forum, “Practical DRR and Science: The Role ofUniversities and Academia in DRR” at UNWCDRR, and more than 100 people attended. It included
three sessions: “Bridging the Gap between Science and Practice,” “How Can Science and Technology
Contribute to Practical DRR?” and “The Role of Social Science in DRR.” The participants engaged
actively in the discussions.
Furthermore, APRU was invited by UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) to the Asia
Science, Technology and Academia Stakeholder Group in May 2015. The objectives of this group are
to enhance and strengthen the capacities of the academic science and technology communities interms of disaster risk reduction, to assist governments in science-based decision making to implement
the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR), and to enhance networking for better
Presentations

utilization of scientific innovations and higher education resources. Through this platform, the MH
Program aims to address important issues at a high level and influence policy and decision-making
processes as well as to contribute to the implementation of a disaster-resilient society.

23How to make a healthy resilient community
Shinichi Egawa
Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

Disaster and Disease have many common features. Disaster is defined as an emergency in which thehumanitarian needs are beyond local capacity to meet those needs i.e. the response and recovery
operation must be managed at the national and/or international level. Disaster risk is calculated by thefollowing equation: Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability / Capacity. Similar approach to decrease the diseaserisk can be applied to disaster risk reduction. International commitment for disaster risk reduction (DRR)
was crystalized into the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR) in theWorld Conference for DRR in Sendai March 2015, in which “health” was greatly incorporated.
On Mar. 11, 2011, Great East Japan Earthquake (M9.0) and Tsunami attacked the Tohoku Area,
North-east part of Japan and killed more than 18,000 people. Even after 4 years, more than 120,000
people are forced to relocate due to the Nuclear Power Plant accident. Japanese health professionals
had prepared for large scale disaster by establishing Disaster Base Hospitals (DBH), Disaster Medical
Assistant Teams (DMAT), Staging Care Unit (SCU) and Wide Area Transportation System, Emergency
Medical Information System (EMIS) and Disaster Medical and Public Health Coordinator. Thesesystem was managed by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare after experiencing the number ofcrush syndromes and preventable deaths at Hanshin-Awaji Great Earthquake in 1995. The medical
needs of the affected people in 2011 was very different from that in 1995 because of the strengtheningof building cords, huge population relocation due to Tsunami and NPP accident. The needs for nontrauma, non-communicable disease and mental health overwhelmed. The vulnerability of the hospitals
in the affected area revealed that every hospital and health professional should be prepared fordisaster to receive support and provide the local health care in disaster.
Disaster always exceeds the expectations, but the pre-disaster assessment and improvement ofresilience of the health-care system can save the life and the quality of life of people both mentally andphysically.
It is important to understand the notion of SFDRR and implement it. But, at the same time, we
also have to think about what the life is and how we can manage our community to have a better,
healthier life. Collaboration, coordination and transdisciplinary approach is a key to promote mutual
understanding of countries, clusters and each individual.

24

Presentations

25

A Case Study of KAKEAGARE! Japan & Dentsu’s
DRR-Related Business
Shunsuke Matsushima
Dentsu, Inc.

Dentsu has been continuing the “KAKEAGARE! JAPAN” project since the Great East Japan
Earthquake and Tsunami. “KAKEAGARE!” means “run up to a higher ground.” Launched in 2012,
the project aimed to use the experience and lessons learned from the major disaster to develop a
program of tsunami evacuation drills and to create “a culture of evacuation” that can be practiced onan everyday basis. We work with IRIDeS and Kahoku Shimpo Publishing Co., a local newspaper in
the Tohoku area. The project provides programs which vary according to the local conditions. Training
topics can be chosen by local governments and communities.
Another DRR-related project developed by Dentsu is the “Plus SONAE Project,” which means “addpreparation.” We will study, analyze, and develop solutions to DRR, and we will provide services tocustomers in DRR-related business. Our objective is to act as a social solution. We have just recently
launched this concept, so all our DRR-related businesses will be gathered.

26

Earthquake Reconstruction Operations in
Ofunato
Masaaki Miyamoto
Pacific Consultants CO., LTD

Three major differences have been observed between earthquake reconstruction projects and normal
projects. First, in the earthquake reconstruction setting, several projects proceeded simultaneously.
Second, the planning requirements were not immediately implemented. Third, there was a gap
between the residents’ wishes and what the project could accomplish as it progressed.
The earthquake reconstruction project in which I was involved, the “Project of Relocation toUplands” in Ofunato City, Iwate Prefecture, faced considerable hardship, as it took a very long time tomake various adjustments. Because Ofunato has a steep terrain, there was very little land available
to secure residential sites on a hill. In addition, due to the fragile infrastructure and hard soil, anylarge-scale construction work was extremely expensive. Under these conditions and taking into
consideration the demands of the residents, development of the open area around the already existinghouses was recommended. In this way, it was easier to maintain a community intact, spend lessPresentations

money, and complete the project in a shorter time.
Based on the experiences in Ofunato, two proposals can be made with regard to bridging the gap
between science and practice. First, the commitment shown to the areas affected by the Great East
Japan Earthquake must be continued. Thus far, because the government has provided huge amountsof funding to the affected areas, people and resources have gathered in this area. However, the budget
is projected to be vastly reduced in upcoming years, causing many people and resources to leave,
although various issues remain unresolved and projects are not yet completed. Thus, universities willneed to become more actively involved in the future.
The second recommendation concerns preparation for future disasters. A framework for all parties
involved in reconstruction planning must be created, and it should be handed down to others before
the acquired experience is forgotten. In addition, it is important to improve communication between
academics and consultants, so that members of both groups can interact on a daily basis as equal
partners. Such collaboration would make it possible to bridge the gap between science and practice,as academics and consultants would be in a position to complement each other.

27

28

Overview of JICA Reconstruction Assistance for
the Great East Japan Earthquake
Midori Kamada
Japan International Cooperation Agency-JICA Tohoku

The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) was established in 1954, and its main
activities involve assistance for developing countries. Most of JICA’s Great East Japan Earthquake
reconstruction assistance has been done in Miyagi Prefecture. The basic concept is “resilience throughresonance among diversified societies.” We conducted two researches aiming to investigate various
assistance approaches that have been undertaken in the disaster-affected areas in Tohoku for the
purpose of considering effective reconstruction assistance and community support.
JICA partnership programs support and jointly implement cooperation projects for developing
countries based on the experiences and technologies accumulated by NGOs, local governments, or
universities. Further, Banda Aceh, Indonesia, and the Higashimatsushima Organization for Progress
and Economy, Education, Energy are all collaborating. This project aims to promote collaborative workthrough reconstruction outcomes of Banda Aceh City and Higashimatsushima City to create a model
Presentations

for collaborative assistance among countries and regions that have suffered natural disasters. Ourinternational cooperation trend is shifting from vertical to horizontal, and this project represents theidea of learning from and sharing with each other. We have also sent two Regional Reconstruction
Facilitators to Higashimatsushima City to help revitalize the society.
Finally, we are considering the development of human resources for reconstruction assistance. In
the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, those who were working in the field ofinternational cooperation came back to Japan to provide community support in the disaster-affectedareas. We feel it is important to support human resources because they can work domestically andinternationally.

29

The 3rd UN World Conference on Disaster
Risk Reduction- Overview and Results of theConference
Akira Takahashi
Director, Disaster-Resilient and Environmentally Progressive City Promotion
Office,City Planning Policy Bureau, Sendai City

Background of the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction
There has been growing international concern on disaster risk reduction in the past 15 years before
this conference since many large-scale disasters have occurred throughout the world. Disasterrisk reduction is essential to realize sustainable development. The 3rd conference held in Sendai
City aimed to review the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action and its priority actions,which were mapped out at the 1st conference held in Yokohama in 1994 and developed at the 2nd
conference held in Hyogo in 2005. It also aimed to discuss a post-2015 framework.
Why the conference was hosted by Sendai City
Our objectives of hosting the conference are as follows:-To contribute to disaster risk reduction around the world by transmitting the experiences and lessons
learned from many disasters, including the Great East Japan Earthquake.
-To develop the city as a world-leading disaster-resilient city with advanced disaster management
policies, drawing global attention to its policies, as a city that had experienced disasters and therecovery process-To be recognized as an international convention city by hosting the largest-ever international
conference in the city, thereby securing more visitors, especially foreign visitors, because the numberof visitors had considerably decreased since the 2011 earthquake.
What is the UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction?
The 3rd UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction was held from March 14 to 18 in Sendai
City. The main conference was attended by 6,593 people, including representatives from 185 UN
member states, international organizations, NGOs, and the media. The conference ended with the
adoption of two outcome documents: the “Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030,”
which is an international guiding principle for disaster risk reduction for the next 15 years, and the“Sendai Declaration.”30

Overview of the conference held in Sendai City
The main conference consisted of three segments, the Inter-Governmental Segment, in which
discussions were conducted mainly between UN member states, Multi-Stakeholder Segment, in which
many stakeholders participated to discuss various topics, and the Public Forum, in which some side
events were held by UN-related organizations. As for the Public Forum, nearly 400 side events andindoor and outdoor exhibitions were held during the conference, which were attended by approximately
150,000 participants.
Results and evaluation of the conference
In the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, ideas suggested by Japan, suchas the importance of investment in disaster risk reduction, commitment by various stakeholders, andPresentations

the concept of “Build Back Better,” were included. At the same time, it was capped with the name of
Sendai. We believe that the conference will serve as a starting point for Sendai City to be recognized
as a disaster-resistant city.

31

Towards disaster risk reduction city: A disasterresilient Tagajo City
Manabu Suzuki
Chief, Bureau of Reconstruction Promotion, Office of Mayor, Tagajo
City

Tagajo City is located in the eastern region of Miyagi Prefecture near Sendai City, about 12 kilometers
away from central Sendai. The population is 62,873 as of June 2015. Tagajo City was greatly damagedby the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami in 2011. The tsunami hit the city approximately one
hour after the earthquake. The highest wave reached 4.6 meters. One-third (662 ha) of the city was
inundated by water, and about 12,000 people fled to evacuation sites such as schools.
A severe and inconvenient evacuation life started. As a result of the tsunami, a total of 188 precious
lives were lost, and over 11,000 houses were destroyed in the city. Factories and offices in theindustrial area were almost totally destroyed. Before the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami,
it was estimated that there was a 99% probability of an earthquake within 30 years off the coast of
Miyagi Prefecture. Therefore, citizens were relatively prepared for earthquakes, and most were awareof how terrifying tsunamis were. At the same time, however, most people knew that Tagajo City wasnever affected by tsunamis in the past, and thus adopted the mentality that Tagajo would be unaffectedeven after the large-scale tsunami warning was issued. As a result, some people did not evacuate
quickly, and others who evacuated by cars were caught in traffic jams, causing many injuries andcasualties.
There are four major points in the DRR city strategy.
１．“Developing a disaster-resilient city.” Four strategies have been drawn up, centering on theconstruction of infrastructure.
２．“Increasing DRR capability based on self-help and mutual help.” Two strategies have been
implemented so that citizens and local communities can cope with disasters by themselves, rather
than depending fully on local administrations.
３．“Sharing disaster experience.” The aim of this strategy is to pass on the experience of disasters
accurately to future generations so that they are not forgotten.
４．“DRR technology.” This is a strategy that enables companies to maximize their strength and be
involved in projects that only regions damaged by the disaster can engage in, enabling theseareas to turn the disaster experience into something productive and positive.
Under the four goals, eight implementation strategies were established.
Strategy 1: “Building multiple barriers for tsunami.”
Although sea walls will be constructed along the coast as a result of the damages seen in the2011 disaster, these are only sufficient to cope with tsunamis that will strike once in 100 years.
Therefore, when a huge tsunami that occurs once in 1,000 years strikes, overflow and flooding will
result. This strategy aims to overcome this situation by considering evacuation as the basic policy,
even though multiple barriers will be built. Specifically, main projects include the development of32

evacuation announcement facilities to send information accurately and swiftly, the constructionof evacuation roads, the designation of temporary escape buildings to rescue people who areunable to evacuate, and the building of barriers to reduce the force and speed of tsunamis.
Strategy 2: “Developing earthquake-resilient city.”This strategy aims to increase earthquake-resistant roads and bridges, and to promote theretrofit of wooden buildings to make them earthquake-resistant.
Strategy 3: “Minimizing flood damage.”
There is a higher risk of flooding due to the fact that the ground has sunk after the Great East
Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, and due to a recent trend of heavy rain in a short period ofPresentations

time. To overcome this problem, projects such as the development of a rainwater-draining
system and the construction of new rainwater drain pumps have been planned.
Strategy 4: “Developing a disaster response system.”During the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, the number of people who evacuated
was far greater than previously estimated. Thus, evacuation support was insufficient. By
reflecting on that experience, we have reviewed our disaster response system.
Strategy 5: “Enhancing self-help ability.”
The aim of this strategy is to enable citizens themselves to prepare for disasters. Paired with
Tohoku University’s International Research Institute of Disaster Science, we have developed the
DRR handbook that outlines measures on how to cope with and prepare for disasters. We havebeen holding classes for citizens making use of this handbook.
Strategy 6: “Strengthening community DRR capacity.”This strategy aims for the improvement of the DRR capacity, as well as the mitigation of local
communities by such tactics as voluntary emergency drills.
Strategy 7: “Sharing the disaster experience.”
Many pictures of the 2011 disaster were taken, and it is crucial to preserve and compile thoserecords carefully and to share it with future generations.
Strategy 8: “DRR Research Park Program.”
This strategy seeks to promote DRR technology development as well as the accumulation and33

creation of industries using DRR technology by utilizing space created from factories damaged by theearthquake.
Tagajo City experienced tremendous loss due to the tsunami. However, people in Tagajo City also
learned valuable wisdom and survival skills through the experience. In addition, the city received
significant support from all over the world. Consequently, strong determination has been developed inorder to initiate the DRR measures, and to change perceptions from negative to positive through theprocess of reconstruction.

34

To enhance regional capacity for disasterprevention-Future outlook of educational actives fordisaster preventionMari Yasuda
Research Associate, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

During large-scale natural disasters, vulnerable groups, such as children and senior citizens,frequently constitute a high percentage of the deaths and/or injuries that occur. To survive thesedisasters and recover adequately, it is imperative that organizations train for and develop disasterprevention initiatives. The International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) of Tohoku
University deployed a disaster education team to enhance local community resilience and reducethe impact of disasters among elementary students not only in Japan but also in the Philippines after
the destruction of Typhoon Haiyan. This educational program consisted of several workshops forchildren in the highergrade levels of elementary school due to their strong backgrounds and interest inscience. We conducted disaster education workshops at 70schools 4,000students in Japan. And four
elementary schools in areas affected by Typhoon Haiyan. Approximately 200 students participatedin these disaster education workshops and practical drills. After the lectures, positive attitudes about
Presentations

disaster education at the three schools increased. Because large-scale disasters can be accompaniedby potentially diminished government assistance, this educational program seeks to improve disasterrelated self-resiliency through the development of survival capabilities.
Keywords: practical education, disaster adaptation, decision making, evacuation risk communication

35

Automated Operational Earthquake Risk
Assessment: Challenges and PromiseJohn B Rundle
Distinguished Professor and Senior Advisor to APRU MH Program,
Departments of Physics and Geology, University of California Davis
According to statistics compiled by the California Earthquake

Authority, only 10% of California homeowners carry earthquake insurance, presumably due to thecost and limited options available. A recent CEA proposal (dated 10/23/2014) to dramatically expand
the options available for homeowners would replace the current limited rate structure of 10% or 15%
deductibles with a much larger range.
This raises an important question: How is the homeowner to know what rate and deductible tochoose? Since earthquake insurance is typically sold for yearly intervals, frequent changes in seismic
risk will have a real-time impact on the decision of whether to purchase earthquake insurance, and if
so, how much.
An automated system for evaluating and managing personal risk from seismic activity is one
solution to the problem of how to choose an appropriate level of earthquake insurance. Such a systemneeds to compute an earthquake forecast, to propagate the ground motion from the earthquake
source to the structure, and finally to evaluate the structural integrity of a residence when subjected toseismic shaking. Since earthquake hazard can change rapidly in time, the earthquake forecast must
be updated on demand or at least daily using a real-time catalog.
In this talk we describe a system of this type that has been operating for over 4 years at http://
www.openhazards.com and via the iOS mobile app Quakeworks. The tools used to compute this typeof automated personal earthquake risk assessment are built using the best science taken from thepeer reviewed literature. An operational system must also take account of challenges relating to the
expected capabilities of the user base, which place strong constraints on the nature and functions of
the system. The tradeoffs we have considered in designing the system will be discussed here, and theresult can be seen at the URL listed previously.

36

Disaster Risk Reduction, Resilience andSustainability
Kuniyoshi Takeuchi
Advisor, International Centre for Water Hazard and Risk Management under the
auspices of UNESCO (ICHARM)

During the decade from Hyogo Framework for Action to Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk
Reduction, a considerable shift of emphasis on resilience seems taken place. The frequency of usageof resilient or resilience in the Sendai Framework document increased from 20 to 38 times from theHyogo’s and that of vulnerable or vulnerability from 40 to 14 times. Such differences would not be
just a matter of personal preference of writers but a conceptual shift. The shift is from vulnerability
reduction to resilience building which would have a considerable implication in practice. Namely,
disaster risk reduction should aim not only to make communities less affected by hazards, but
accepting time to time being affected badly, make them capable to quickly recover by the affected
communities themselves or a nation or surrounding communities that are prepared to help quick
recovery.
Resilience may be defined as a product of resistibility against hazards and capacity of quick
Presentations

recovery from the disaster. The Sendai Framework emphasizes the building back better which canbe accelerated by resistibility and capacity of quick recovery as both save the cost of recovery till theoriginal order before build back better takes place. This poses a question on the different approaches
taken in Tohoku and Banda Aceh: Under what conditions which approach becomes better towards final
goal: sustainability?

37

People Centered Housing Recovery.... andRelocation?
Liz Maly
Assistant Professor, IRIDeS, Tohoku University

People centered housing recovery is based on the goal of housing recovery that supports life
recovery. Towards that aim, people (the inhabitants) must be put at the center of a processthat creates housing with appropriate: use/functionality; size/shape; structure; cost; location;and other needs for daily life.

Within the housing recovery process, from 1) evacuation, to 2)

temporary housing, and finally 3) permanent housing, there have been ongoing debates for
decades about which is the better approach: minimize expenditure on temporary housing andfocus on permanent housing; acknowledge the need for temporary housing

and focus on

improving it; or more recently, the use of an incremental transitional housing solution.
In Japan, the 3 phases are clearly separated, with different framework, policies, andresponsible agencies for each level. This was also the case after the 1995 Hanshin Awaji
Earthquake, where problems resulting from the use of massive numbers of prefabricatedtemporary housing, and subsequent high-rise public housing for disaster survivors, are wellknown.
Issues after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake are even more complicated for housing
recovery, because: the huge scale and varied condition of the damaged area and many different
municipalities and multiple prefectures; and pre-existing demographic crisis of aging andrural depopulation in coastal areas. In addition, the issues for recovery faced by towns andcommunities contaminated by nuclear radiation caused by the meltdown of the Daiichi nuclear
power plant are unprecedented.
In cases where housing recovery involved relocating communities, it becomes much moredifficult to carry out a people-centered recovery, especially in regards to the locational aspectof housing. By comparing experiences from Japan with the cases of housing relocation after
the 2010 volcanic eruption of Mt. Merapi in Indonesia, 2012 Superstorm Sandy in the U.S.,
and 2013 Typhoon Yolanda in the Philippines, some similarities and shared challenges can be
identified.
The role of relocation in the overall housing recovery varies between these cases, as
does the degree to which the projects are actually reducing future disaster risk for affected
communities. The four cases take different approaches to: the designation of hazardous
land, the degree that residents can opt in or out of relocation, and what kind of housing/landis provided. To consider post-disaster relocation as people-centered housing recovery, thefactors of benefits to residents’ daily life needs need to be balances with the positive impact on
increasing individual and household safety in the face of future disasters.

38

Presentations

39

Group work 1: Disaster education

The participants were divided into four groups and asked to discuss the actions to be taken after adisaster occurs. This exercise is normally conducted for school children to have them think about,understand, and discuss what will happen in a disaster situation and what actions they should take asa group.
The questions were what decisions should be made and what actions could be taken immediately
upon the occurrence of a disaster event (power failure), three minutes later (mobile phones
not functioning), three hours later (getting dark), and three days later (assistance needed fromgovernment, NGOs, etc.). All groups emphasized the importance of collecting various informationsuch as details of the situation, location of evacuation centers, availability of relief items, and others at
all phases. The discussions highlighted the critical need for local governments, offices, schools, andorganizations to ensure that emergency communication can take place in disaster situations and that
information can be disseminated in various ways. At the same time, people need to learn in advance
how to access and obtain relevant information in a disaster situation.

GROUP AI A
・ I need to be safe

・ Try to find parents save・ Is my mom & dad okay?
・ Keep calm but smart
・ Save yourself
・ Worried about myself
・ It is injured or not?

30 min A
・ Arrange life supporting
elements such as lightwater etc. for the light
・ Make sure every thing fine,every thing handled wellhealth, safety, awarenessto the after shock,coordinate & communicate
with other people+ go to meeting point
evacuate
・Find foods
・Prepare for aftershocks
・Check radios
・Check news @evacuationarea
・Look for better place nearby
・Find some firelight

42

Decision
３ min A・ Check if I am safe
completely and evacuate
・ Get out of house・ Think rationally+ check situation + try
to think something
useful・ Careful of cabinet/doors(shaking during
earthquake may fall)・ Care of gas line, valve
３ days A

・ Form a group and withshare information andtraffic and rescue mission
・ Try to find ways to go
back home
・ Make & build rigorous
communication withother people
・ Make sure an important(all) of your document
comes with you
・Rumor / fake news
・traffic jam
・Gather a lot of
information

ActionI A・ Go under the table / safe
place in the house
・ Turn off the gas
・ Check environ.(fire)
whether anyone injured
・ Follow the safety
procedure(whatever is that hide,safe or life)!!
・ Call police or emergency

30 min A
・Check for storage,
store your mobile
battery
・Get water as much as
possible
・Be careful about
aftershocks and go toevacuation area
・Run to evacuate point /communicate to others,
learn the situation, handle it& make sure safe!
・Warn & be read to thepost earthquake
・Go to the crowded place or
the muster point

３ min A・ evacuate
・ Find way out
・ Shut down pipeline valve
・ Start putting stuff into
big bag・ Check and make sure allthings safe (the mostimportant, myself)
・ Look your situation & think
what you can do
・Check others condition

３ days A
・Look for rescue mission,
trains, flights, bus to takeout・Make community anddecide what to do (orwhat is important to do)・Stop communicating
rumors・Make effort tocommunicate to govern‐
ment people / otherpeople・Back to my place, find mybelongings + importantly
documents
・Check all again
・Make a small group to get
all of information.

GROUP B
Time

StatusImmediately
After

It was power
failureDecision

Action・Leaving the room・Find the safe place・Protect myself
・Take hand phone
・Send text back home

・Go to out side, free area ,meeting point
・Pick up cell‐phone and leave indoor
・Hide underneath table, text sending
・If it’s safe, move!
・Hide yourself in the safe place
・Cover my head with something (hide under thedesk, cover my head with bag)・Try to visualize where I am
・Try to find safe places to evacuate
Mobile phone
not functioning

・Try to imagine the extent of damages
・Put it down
・Try to get information・Remain calm
・Wait for next warning &Announcement

・Follow the instruction from HSE/Crew/
・Go to upward ground・Access any information source
・Find a friend
・Still under the table
・Try to find and use a communication devise
・Try to find people who we can communicate
・Stay with locals!! Don’t separated!

30 mins
after

It’s getting dark・What should I do next?
・Follow/stay (depending on the magnitudeof the disaster) （2nd/3rd tremor)・Move to evacuation area
・Move to safer place
・I need the shelter
・Try to communicate with neighbors andrelatives・Get to safe place (shelters?)
・Be safe
・Ask someone for the shelter
・Informing my family about the status
・Look for people who need support
・Help others!!!
・Look for something to start f ire
・Look for a flash light or something equivalent

3 daysafter

Food/H2O/
Help/assistance
From the
NGO/NPO/GOV・Get embassy help
・Familiarize with other people
・Give help/offer help if I’m not injured
・Go home
・Want to get stable evacuate life
・Try to follow the orders and be not panic

・To move forwards safer area
・Follow other people (Japanese)
・Carry out
・Find the way to go home
・Try to help others and survive myself
・Move to a base shelter I can get support

Group work discussions

3 minsafter

GROUP CTIME

STATUSDECISIONIMMEDIATELY
AFTER

THERE WAS
POWER
FAILURE

Evacuate

3 MINUTESAFTERMOBILE
PHONE ISNOTCONNECTED

30 MINUTES
LATER

IT IS
GETTING
DARK

3 DAYSLATERACTION
HigherPlace

Find the assemblyarea & gather there
Place

Listen Radio

Gathering Info

Prevent
Rumor

I will check thecondition of myself &other people

Do the headcounts& check our friends
condition

Call theEmergency
number to seek
medical assistance

Go to local
shelter

Assess building
Assess safety

Food, clean water,
Sanitation,
Stay in theblankets, etc.
Shelter
Until everything
gets back tonormalAssess thecondition
whether it’ssafe or not togo back home

Not usecars

Takenecessities

Help eachother in the
shelter43

GROUP D
Decision①
Immediately after②
3min after・Move to safe location
・Be sure you are safe
・Making sure we are safe
・Surrounded environment is safe or not
・Where I am
・Be sure our family are safe
・Make sure ourselves are safe
・Make sure where we are safe as outside & building or inside・Sit or lay down beside a bed or a counter・Calm down

・Going to beside of bed
・Going to open place
・Staying the room
・Turn off the gas
・Trying to rescue people
・Find generators
・Check open area ,check electricity ,gas・Don’t use elevator
・Call family & relatives

・Look for alternative communication ways

・Using radio to get information
・Going to shelter ,higher ground・Report yourself
・Use radio or public address
・Stay against furniture or wall or high open ground・Look for flash light & radio

・Replace any important lost functions③
30min after④

・Look for alternative light resource
・Find shelter
・Look for food・You should evacuate
・Connect with other people

・Prepare evacuate yourself
・Go to grocery store
・Go to farm ( corps & fruit)・Look for authorities or people who need help
・Use candle, flashlight & ask for help
・Try to find out injured people to help
・Using candle, hand light・Staying safe place

・Put detail information
・Report detailed information to rescuers
・Report detailed information to specialists
・Go to embassy
・To help people in need(volunteer, help take care of injured,
help distribute supplies)
・Report problems and status to authorities
・Work with community together

・Finding friend, family

3days after

44

Action・Survival & resilience
・Make sure all need are taken care of・Help other people

Group work 2: How can academia contribute to the implementation of thefour SFDRR priorities?

◦ Various assessments have already been conducted, but they have not been effectively presented byresearchers. Academics could contribute more to Priorities 1 and 4 than to Priorities 2 and 3 of the Sendai
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. How can we contribute, and what are the existing challenges?
First, academia possesses technical expertise that enables us to understand risks. Another strength isthat academics are generally unbiased. For instance, the reports developed by NGOs and governments
often include differing data and perspectives, which can lead to a bias in reports. Additionally, academics
traditionally are strong in their ability to collect and maintain relevant data and information. On theother hand, academics are often more interested in writing and publishing papers than in how to apply
their research output practically. Innovation and research are important, but the responsibilities ofacademics should transcend that. Governments are interested in outputs. For instance, simple, onepage recommendations to governments are useful. It is also necessary to have “promoters” who cancollaborate with academics and help to promote their works and capacities.
◦ Academia can provide technical knowledge for various assessments, such as assessments of MultiHazards, Vulnerability, Exposure, Risk, Damage, and Potential, which contribute to priority 1. Theserisks need to be identified and communicated to policymakers, so it is important to strengthen thelinks between academia and policymakers, which is related to priority 2. Various stakeholders need toGroup work discussions

get involved in reducing identified risks, such as NGOs, governments, the private sector, academia,
and communities (priority 3). Then, all these efforts can contribute to priority 4, which is to strengthen
preparedness and response capacities as well as to improve recovery processes.
◦ For priority 1, academia can play a role in education and raising awareness through educational materials
such as videos, textbooks, and posters, both inside and outside the classroom. In addition, evacuation
drills must be conducted regularly at schools. For priority 2, it is important to establish and strengthen
collaboration with different stakeholders through workshops, trainings, etc. In particular, communicationand links among various stakeholders in governments, academia, and other sectors is necessary toachieve a fully prepared DRR society. This goal cannot be achieved by academia alone.
◦ Academia has various capacities and roles in DRR: communications, sharing data, securing funds,
assessing risks, translating technology, and organizing workshops with communities. Scholars andresearchers who fill these roles are very useful and important in building social and cultural resilience.
In addition, it is possible to develop education and awareness-building materials such as movies todisseminate knowledge on the nature of disasters and other topics of concern. Through such materials,
people can better understand the risks and what disasters are. Communication between scientists andgovernments is highly important.

45

GROUP A

①

③

③

②

46

Priority Ⅰ

Main Stake

Priority Ⅱ

Minor Stake

Priority Ⅲ

Minor Stake

Priority Ⅳ

Main / Sub
Stake

Understanding risk
(Traditional input)

Opp.

Challenges

Strength

Weakness• Communication in
general language• SFDRR framework(International) bodies(IRDR, IDRC, etc.)*• Baseline (Generate /Methods)• Data (??) →Ac.
→Rel.
→Res.
• Self‐promotion (Forum)• No boarder /Collaboration

Risk gov.

Invest in DRR

Disaster preparedness• Expertise• Unbiased / (Forceful??)open‐minded• Innovation• We want to be unique!
• Fund / Money /Incentives

GROUP B
Priority 1
Understanding
disaster risk
Priority 2
Strengthening
DRR
governance
Priority 3
Investing inDRR
for resilience

Multi‐hazard
assessment

Vulnerability
assessment

Exposure
assessment

Risk assessment

Damageassessment

Potential new risk

Priority 4
Rehabilitation &Reconstruction
B.B.B.

Stronger connection between
policy makers and academia

Policy to manage risk

Risk Reduction Activities

Academia

Structural mitigation

Knowledge

Stronger building

Priority 4
Enhancing
preparednessfor effective
response

Non‐structural
mitigation
Information education
campaign

Stake holders
NGOs

Gov.

Privatesector$Output for consultation
End user
Effective response

Preparedness

Priority 1

Priority 2

Priority 3

Priority 4• Strengthen the university
network → Academia, Gov.,
Industry, Expert, Lay people, etc.
“in various way”, “before&after”• Build a rigorous communication
between various type & level ofstakeholders• “Preparedness & responses”• Education completely for all thepeople about the “disaster” inany kind of ways
• “Power of communication”
Local – national – Intl.
• Sharing information• Strong community• Response – react mechanism• Coop. → Gov., Industry, Expert, NGO,
NPO, etc. and Academia Agreement“before & after” disaster• Evaluation for the whole program• Build strong governance → Community
trust!
• Law and policy should be set up before
the disaster• Drills for all the people• Research about build backbetter• Make students think aboutbuild back better• Education & Dissemination –video, text book, posters• Add compulsory class in primary/ middle school to directly teachchildren knowledge of disasters• Holding a meeting for parents
about “How dangerous
Tsunami”, “How to save yourchildren”• Using internet• Use open source / social media/ enhanced the education /library facilities to the people• Making class at school,
emergency drills started fromelementary schools• Holding workshop about DRR at
school or children’s house• Make a strong cooperation between
stakeholders → Make an event todiscuss DRR between stakeholders• Quantifying / assessing the risk
• Reveal the potential risk
• Build a strong publication (research,conference, etc.) , international
journal• Hold on open public workshop /seminar/ training, coop. withacademic, gov., industry, NGO,
advertising, NPO and UN• Share & learn successful casestudies• Strong relationship between
consultant and government,
supervise – report mechanism• Collaboration, research,
implementation & dissemination• Scenario‐based proposal to show how
effective the investment• Setting up the indicators of theeffectiveness of the program• Determining campus facilities to be
used for shelters• Clear info. for shelter / assemble point→ signs• The improvement of IT implementation→ Diffusion to the society• Advertisement → campaigns• Gov. + Academia → NGO, NPO →Meeting, seminar, etc.
→ Roundtable, public class• Develop evacuation guidance• Cooperative research with companies• Cooperation with Gov. + academia /dept. ,research, etc.
• Better explanation of study• Evacuation guidance• Having a good relationshipwith your neighborhood• Support making various
plan• Develop new effective DRR
education way• Help evacuating the drills

Understanding disaster risk

Governance and manage

InvestingGroup work discussions

GROUP C
Preparedness for effective
response / Build back better

47

GROUP D
What we need (to do)?
•••Secure funding…
Matching / setting on
at least common
ground Gov. +Academia /Academia+ Society
Be listened toWhat we could do?
•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Share data!
Employ ground up
approach
Improvecommunication with/ govt. / private
sectors / otheracademia
Multiple perspectives
Collect data
To tell the truth
Bettercommunication!
Sharing information
Accumulate
experience
Contribute in the
improvement ofdisaster
preparedness(interactive tech.)

What we want to do?
•

•
•

•
•
•

•
•

48

Spread theknowledge & theimportance of DRR –so someone gonna
invest / govt.
Theory – practicebalance
Translate knowredge
into “understandable
language”→government→society
Workshop for
community
Platform for
multidisciplinary togather & discuss
Gather with / govt. /private sector →action plan andagreement
Arise the awarenessof government to pay
attention
Build trust

•
•
•

•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•

Sustainability /action research
Movies, Media,“Apps”
Give suggestions
about / DRR
implementation /disaster education→build better
resilience community
Be flexible!
Compromise“Tsunami Run” “FunRun” events
Joint event – drill,
education, program
Multidisciplinary
research &implementation
about disaster tech,ideas, info
Exercises, practiceMore postdocs, more
opportunity
IRIDeSField trip to Higashi-Matsushima City and Tagajo City on 23 July 2015

The participants joined the field trip to the areas affected by the Great East Japan Earthquakea n d Ts u n a m i . T h e p l a c e s i n c l u d e Ts u k i h a m a b e a c h , O k u m a t s u s h i m a “ k i z u n a ” s o l a rpark, Nobiru station, disaster public housing, Tagajo civil center and Tagajo High School.

Diocel Harold M. Aquino
Assistant Professor, University of the Philippines Diliman
I dream to see the day when people will fear the threat of disasters no more. Participating in the APRU
Multi-Hazards Summer School 2015, engaging with experts and young people with the same vision,
gave me a pocketful of hope to live in pursuit of that dream.
The summer school was very conducive to a fruitful exchange of ideas. The resource persons areexperts in various fields (natural science, engineering, information technology, medicine, social scienceand humanities) applied to disaster risk management. As an engineer, I have gained a lot of new insights
and my perspective has greatly broadened. The talks were complemented by discussions with fellow
summer school participants who are all passionate and knowledgeable about the topic and enthusiastic
in sharing their thoughts on the matter.
One that really got stuck in my head is the topic on memorializing disasters. Disasters are always apainful experience. The pain and grief from a disaster would be futile if we don’t pick up the lessons fromit. This is why it is important to gather these lessons, share these to other people, and preserve themfor the sake of the future generations. I am deeply amazed at the passion of the high school students in
Tagajo City in sharing learnings about the GEJE tsunami and their project on marking the 311 tsunami
levels in key areas of the city. I am also glad that Japan is serving as a catalyst in the exchange ofexperiences and learnings from previous disasters, such as the Great East Japan Earthquake, theBanda Aceh tsunami in Indonesia and Typhoon Haiyan devastation in the Philippines.
During the fieldtrip, we visited a solar farm built in an area that was stricken by the GEJE tsunami.
This engraved stone caught my eye. I asked what
the word is and I found out that it’s kizuna, whichmeans bond. I believe that it’s such a strong word.
For people and communities to be resilient, the must
be strong bond and work together for the common
good
All in all, I’ve gotten so much from APRU MultiHazards Summer School, more than what I have50

expected. Not only was my head filled with new learnings, my heart was also filled with inspiration fromthe people I’ve come to know at the summer school and the field trips. I highly recommend this summer
school to all researchers working in the field of multi-hazards resilience and disaster risk reduction.

In Tagajo City

Roozbeh Hasanzadeh Nafari
PhD Student, University of Melbourne
In July 2015 I was funded by the University of Melbourne for participating in the APRU-IRIDeS MultiHazards program. This program was held in Tohoku University and includes three days seminar andField trip

one day site visiting. In the context of seminars, we became more familiar with the natural hazards ofearthquake and tsunami, specific to Japan. Also, it was a good chance for us in regard of understanding
the practice of japan in terms of decreasing the different aspects of vulnerability; archiving andlearning from the past; implementing the risk mitigation measures in an optimal manner; building aresilient society; prioritizing the disaster risk reduction matter; and minimizing the adverse effects ofnatural hazards. It is notable that these important issues were analyzed and discussed toward theimplementation of the Sendai framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR).
On the other hand, we had a field trip to the affected areas by the 2011 disasters in the third day ofthis program. For me it was very interesting that how the involved organizations are trying to build backthe society better by implementing some structural and non-structural mitigation measures. To be moredetailed, reconstruction in Tsukihama Beach, relocation plan of Nobiru Station and construction of aredundant solar park in Okumatsushima "kizuna" were some examples of this important matter.
Subsequently, we had a visit from the city of Tagajo for understanding the strategy of this city inregard of disaster risk reduction. In this context, we visited a disaster public housing in the Sakuragi area.
The indoor architect of this building was very interesting to me because some facilities such as: childcare

51

centre; facility for the elderly; meeting place; connection bridge between the second floors; and tsunami
evacuation stairs, for a better performance in the time of disaster, were designed and placed in thisbuilding. Afterwards, we had a meeting with the mayor of this city and then we went for visiting the Tagajo
high school. In this school I was totally impressed by the efforts that have been made for educating theyoung generation with the aim of coping with the impacts of future natural hazards. Also, memorizing thepast events and archiving them were other activities that have been accomplished by the company ofthese students. Considering such a long term strategy is admirable and could be very beneficial for thedisaster risk reduction purposes.
All in all, participating in this program and visiting the city of Sendai were not only technicallybeneficial, but also it became as a memorable time and experience that I can highly recommend it to all.

Okumatsushima "kizuna" solar park

Nobiru Station

Alwina Fitria Maulidiani
Research Assistant, University of Indonesia
As one of APRU-IRIDes Multi-Hazards Summer School’s students this year, I was very lucky to getwonderful experiences and new knowledge about disaster, especially regarding earthquake andtsunami, directly from the country that already had experienced and managed to overcome thosedisasters. I also live in a disaster high risk country, but I have never experienced massive disasters
such as tsunami before. Jakarta, the city where I live, which also the capital city of Indonesia, only
has flood problem every year. One of the biggest tsunami in Indonesia happened in Banda Aceh,
Sumatra Island on 2004 and I realized how awful the disaster could be and how bad the impact forcommunity just from the news, videos, and reports about it. However, directly visiting the disaster
affected areas was a new experience for me and I would like to thank APRU-IRIDes for giving methat chance by conducting the field trip to Higashimatsushima and Tagajo City on July 23rd, 2015.

52

Starting from the video played on the bus during our way to Higashimatsushima City, I was able tovisualize the enormous wave that once destroyed coastal areas of Miyagi Prefecture during Great East
Japan Earthquake (GEJE) disaster. After we arrived and I saw directly with my own eyes the vast areas
covered with weeds and pebbles that once had been a lively place, I realized the real power of natural
disaster that can create such damage to a city. Once again, it emphasized the importance of educationand early warning system to prepare the community in evacuation when a disaster happens to save more
lives. I was also impressed to see how fast the reconstruction had been done in Higashimatsushima City.
Just in four years, they already had reconstructed the train station, elevating lands, building temporary
and public houses, and many things to make Higashimatsushima a more resilient city. One of my favorite
parts of this field trip was when we were asked to write down our messages to Higashimatsushima on
a brick that will be used for constructing a new building. It felt like I am also contributing in rebuilding
the city into a better one. After that, we went to a restaurant near the Matsushima Bay. I really enjoyedthe view of Matsushima Bay, the hospitality given by APRU-IRIDes and the local people, and also
the traditional Japanese meal served by the restaurant. In my opinion, this field trip gave me not
only a new knowledge and experience on-site but also a new sight of Japanese culture and tourism.
After we finished eating, we went to another affected area, Tagajo City, and surprisingly the facilitators
who explained the past disaster to us were students from Tagajo High School. They even createdevacuation mapping zone of Tagajo, installed tsunami signs at strategic places all over the city, andalso contributed at UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai. Once again I was
impressed by the real evidence of the good education system in Japan which had already made disaster
Field trip

as a concern to school students. By raising awareness of young generation about the disaster, Japan
will become a resilient country in the future. I wish that Indonesia could also become a disaster resilient
country like Japan and I cannot wait to share what I have got from this summer school to my family,colleagues, and friends in Indonesia.

Writing messages on bricks

53Nafesa Ismail
PhD Student, Kyoto University
I am really grateful for the opportunity to be selected to attend APRU program in Tohoku as it was my firsttime to the region. Upon reaching the Sendai city, it was hard to imagine that some parts of this region
were devastated by the 2011 disaster until the Field Trip day.
The seminars provided were very useful as most of the topic were very much of my interest and I
really learnt a lot. For example, in the Archiving and Memorising lecture was one of my favorites. The
lecture emphasized on the significant of collecting and preserving those memories and experiences ofdisaster victims. I am very amazed at the Japanese’s culture of sustaining their disaster histories andhope to introduce and develop the culture back home. I also managed to have a short discussion withthe speaker on how to collect and carry out disaster experiences which to be conducted in Malaysia as
one of my works later.
Additionally, I also was exposed to the mechanism of earthquake prediction from the United States.
This was also another highlight of the seminar as many participants showed much interest on the topic.
For me, this is a good information that I will be sharing during my field trip to SEADPRI-UKM Malaysia
with the earthquake department. The timing of the APRU falls nicely into my calendar as after the
program, I am heading to Malaysia for my field trip which also helps me to share my experiences andknowledge for the incoming discussions as well as exploring disaster management in Malaysia.
The experience of visiting the devastated areas as well as being guided by high school students who
were previously victims of the tsunami disaster helped me to understand and be aware of how precious
life is and the importance of preparedness against disaster and knowing what to do in case of disaster.
I also got the opportunity to be interviewed and featured in the local newspaper after the field trip withthe high school students. I am fortunate to be able to hear from the younger generation of their disaster
experiences and their aspiration of transferring those experiences to their future generations.
What makes the program interesting and wonderful was the international participants from multidisciplinary fields with vast knowledge. These people from all over the world have come together toshare, teach and discuss on a topic which were looked from various perspective.
Overall, the knowledge sharing was a plus for me as being in this kind of program helped me tounderstand better of my research topic and focusing on what is my interest. I strongly recommend those
who are new to the disaster management area as well experts to be given chance to participate as thediverse background contributes to the interesting discussions during the lectures which helps many tosee a different side of the problem.

54

Nobiru Station

Matsushima

Field trip

Tsukihama Beach

Tagajo High School

55

ANNEX I : APRU-IRIDeS Summer School Program
21-22 and 24 July: Seminar at the IRIDeS building on the Aobayama New Campus,
Tohoku University
23 July: Field trip to Higashi-Matsushima City and Tagajo City

July 2109：00 － 09：30

Opening ceremony
Opening remarks by Prof. Susumu Satomi (President, Tohoku University)
Opening remarks by Dr. Christopher Tremewan(Secretary General, the APRU secretariat)
Opening remarks by Prof. Fumihiko Imamura (Director of IRIDeS)
Group photo

09：30 － 10：15 “Interdisciplinary Research in IRIDeS”(Prof. Makoto Okumura, Deputy Director, IRIDeS)
10：15 － 11：00 “New International Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction”(Prof.Yuichi Ono, IRIDeS)
11：00 － 11：30 Coffee break/ Moving to the Lecture room
11：30 － 12：30 “Roles of Archives and Memories in Disaster Risk Reduction”(Dr. Sebastian Boret, IRIDeS)
12：30 － 14：00 Lunch/ Lunch session about APRU activities (Dr. Takako Izumi, IRIDeS)
14：00 － 15：00 “How to Develop Healthy Resilient Community”(Prof. Shinichi Egawa, IRIDeS)
15：00 － 16：00	“A Case Study of KAKEAGARE! Japan and Dentsu’s DRR Related Business” (Mr.
Shunsuke Matsushima, Dentsu)
16：00 － 16：15 Coffee break
16：15 － 17：15 “Earthquake Reconstruction Operations in Ofunato”(Mr. Masaaki Miyamoto, Pacific Consultants CO., LTD)

July 2209：00 － 10：00	“JICA’s Recovery Efforts in Tohoku” (Ms. Midori Kamada, Japan International
Cooperation Agency – JICA Tohoku)
10：00 － 11：00	“The 3rd UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction – Overview and Resultsof the Conference” (Mr. Akira Takahashi, Sendai City)56

11：00 － 11：30 Coffee break
11：30 － 12：30 	“Towards Disaster Risk Reduction City: Tagajo ~ Disaster Resilient City” Mr. Manabu
Suzuki, Tagajo City)
12：30 － 14：00 Lunch/ Lunch session: experience sharing by the participants
14：00 － 14：30	“Effective Evacuation Behavior with Knowledge on Natural Disasters” (Ms. Mari
Yasuda, IRIDeS)
14：30 － 16：00 Group work 1: Disaster Education
16：00 － 16：15 Coffee break
16：15 － 17：00 Group presentation and discussion

July 23: Field trip
Higashi-Matsushima City and Tagajo City

July 24
09：30 － 10：30 “Automated Operational Earthquake and Hazard Risk Assessment”(Prof. John Rundle, University of California, Davis)
Field trip

10：30 － 11：30 “Disaster Risk Reduction, Resilience and Sustainability”(Prof. Kuniyoshi Takeuchi, Advisor to ICHARM)
11：30 － 11：45 Coffee break
11：45 － 12：45 “People Centered Housing Reconstruction”(Dr. Elizabeth Maly, IRIDeS)
12：45 － 14：00 Lunch/ Lunch session: experience sharing by the participants
14：00 － 15：30	Group work 2: What can academia do to implement the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction?
15：30 － 15：45 Coffee break
15：45 － 16：15 Group presentation and discussion
16：15 － 16：30 Closing

57

ANNEX II : List of Participants

Name

58

StatusCountry

University

1

Citra Satria Ongkowijoyo Ph.D. Student

Australia

University of Melbourne

2

Roozbeh Hasanzadeh Nafari Ph.D. Student

Australia

University of Melbourne

3

Jie YuPh.D.Student

CanadaQueen's University

4

Zhaohao MAO

M.A. Student

China

Fudan University

5

Reza Syahputra

LecturerIndonesia

University of Indonesia

6

Agus Riyanto

M.A. Student

Indonesia

University of Indonesia

7

Alwina Fitria Maulidiani

Research AssistantIndonesia

University of Indonesia

8

InYoung Bae

M.A. Student

Japan

Kobe University

9

Rajarshi DasGupta

Ph.D.Student

Japan

Kyoto University

10

Nafesa Ismail

Ph.D.Student

Japan

Kyoto University

11

Kensuke Otsuyama

M.A. Student

Japan

Kyoto University

12

Moeko Kato

UndergraduateJapan

Miyagi Gakuin Women's University

13

Chiaki Kikuchi

UndergraduateJapan

Miyagi Gakuin Women's University

14

Fumiyasu Makinoshima

M.A. Student

Japan

Tohoku University

15

Xi Jiaoru

Ph.D.Student

Japan

Tohoku University

16

Dyshelly Nurkartika

M.A. Student

Japan

Tohoku University

17

Sachi Suzuki

Ph.D.Student

Japan

Tohoku University

18

Shinya Uekusa

Ph.D.Student

New Zealand The University of Auckland

19

Diocel Harold M. Aquino

Assistant Professor

Philippines University of the Philippines Diliman

20

SUN Yabin

Research Fellow

Singapore

National University of Singapore

21

DU Saizhao

Ph.D.Student

Singapore

National University of Singapore

22

Parichat Wetchayont

Lecturer

Thailand

Mahidol University

23Mark R. Yoder

Postdoctoral Researcher USA

University of California, Davis

24

John Max Wilson

Ph.D. Student

USA

University of California, Davis

25

Fumihiko Imamura

Director

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

26

Makoto Okumura

Professor

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

27

Yuichi Ono

Professor

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

28

Sebastian Boret

Assistant Professor

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

29

Takako Izumi

Associate Professor Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

30

Shinichi Egawa

Professor

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

31

Shunsuke Matsushima

Chief Producer

Japan

Dentsu Inc.

32

Masaaki Miyamoto

Assistant Manager

Japan

Pacific Consultants CO., LTDName

StatusCountry

University

33

Midori Kamada

Program Officer

Japan

JICA Tohoku

34

Akira Takahashi

Section ChiefJapan

Sendai City

35

Manabu Suzuki

Chief of Bureau

Japan

Tagajo City

36

Mari Yasuda

Research AssistantJapan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

37

John Rundle

Professor

USA

University of California

38

Kuniyoshi Takeuchi

AdvisorJapan

ICHARM

39

Elizabeth Maly

Assistant Professor

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

40

Andre Edelhoff

Program Director

Germany

APRU secretariat

41

Takuya Ito

Co-Researcher

Japan

Tohoku University (IRIDeS)

Field trip

59

Association of Pacific Rim Universities