5-2. Capacity Building in Member Countries
5-2-1. ADRC Cooperative Project for Promoting the
Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action(1) Background and Objectives
The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations andCommunities to Disasters (HFA) calls on regional organizations to contribute to periodic
reviews on progress and to assist countries, as requested, in the preparation of periodic national
summaries of their progress.
The year of 2012 is almost at the end of the implementation of HFA. The Mid-Term Reviewof the progress of implementation of the HFA, which was compiled by the UNISDR, highlighted
that the significant progress has been made over the past five years in disaster risk reduction.
The Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) Cooperative Project for Promoting
Implementation of HFA was conducted for providing support to the governments of the ADRC
member countries to help them strengthen their commitment, expand resources and make further
progress toward the expected goals of the HFA, and eventually build safer and more resilient
communities in Asia.
ADRC called for the project proposals from the member countries, and the proposals fromArmenia and Tajikistan were selected after careful screening.
The project included the Peer Review in the process of the implementation of the proposed
activities for making the project more effective through mutual learning.

(2) Education and Training on Seismic Protection in the Cities of Yerevan and Gyumri
in Armenia① Context and Project Purpose
Armenia provides an example of seriously affected district by single major earthquake in asmall-sized country (29,000 square kilometers), with high population density (117 per square
kilometer). A textbook example is the Spitak Earthquake in 1988 (M7.0) killed 25,000 people.
One of the lessons learned from this earthquake was that the level of disaster risk awareness andpreparedness by population was far lower than required.
For this reason, they planned a project of capacity building for seismic safety througheducation and information dissemination at community levels. The target was for schools andmunicipalities.

38

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

② Outline of the Project Activities
To achieve the above-mentioned challenge, the following activities were conducted.

1) Information collection from relevant agencies
Collecting data regarding policy to protect population from seismic disaster from foreign
relevant agencies, then analyzing them.

2) Revision and distribution of the teaching materials
Revision and distribution of educational information materials distributed to different target
groups.

3) Conducting a workshop for disaster education
A workshop for the stakeholder of the project on disaster prevention education was conductedin collaboration with the experts dispatched by ADRC.

4) Holding training and drills
Disaster prevention education, training, exercises, contests, and drills were held at schools andlocal communities.

Fig. 5-2-1-1

Disaster Prevention Education at the Community(3) Disaster Risk Assessment in Rudaki district of Tajikistan① Context and Project Purpose
Central Asia is prone to natural disasters such as flood, landslide, and earthquake. More than
90% of land of Tajikistan is located in the mountainous area and the majority of population lives
there. In particular, Rudaki district located between two rivers has been damaged by floods
annually. In addition to these floods, high population growth and unplanned urbanization
brought higher economic loss comparing other districts, which is shown as figure below.

39

Fig. 5-2-1-2

Disaster Prevention Education at the Community

In this context, to reduce damage caused by disaster, it is essential to appropriately understandthe risks people are exposed to, and share the knowledge of the risks and how to prepare for
mitigating damages with people. And capacity development of local government officials to deal
with disaster risk reduction activities should be addressed.
The objects of this project are as below.
‐

Building the capacity of the government, private sector and civil society to cope with natural
disaster‐

Increasing awareness and capacity to manage disaster risks at community level by disasterrisk map‐

Combining district-prepared development plan with disaster risk management plan‐

Enhancing efficient collaboration with local authorities, communities and other relevant
actors‐Using satellite images in disaster risk and hazard assessment② Outline of the ProjectTo achieve the above-mentioned objects, the following activities were conducted.

1) Information collection from relevant agencies
Collection of topographic maps and satellite images from the Research Center of the State
Committee for Land Management, Geodesy and Cartography of the Republic of Tajikistan, and
Demographic data from Agency of Statistics under the President Office, and others

2) Field surveys
Sociological survey and Geological survey were conducted in the target area40

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

3) Re-processing satellite data
Re-processing and digitizing the satellite and Google images of Rudaki district4) Risk assessment
Land use classification and spatial analysis using high resolution satellite data were conducted.
After analyzing the results of the field surveys, data base was developed.

5) Development of flood and landslide hazard maps for Rudaki district
Based on the result of the activities 3) and 4), flood and mudflow hazard maps for target area
were developed6) Conducting a workshop to share the project results with the communities in thetarget area
A workshop for local authorities and population in Rudaki district was conducted to share theresults of risk assessment and to have them to make use of hazard maps for risk management in
future.

7) Conducting a workshop to deepen risk assessment knowledge
A workshop to deepen the risk assessment knowledge to mitigate flood disaster was
conducted, where project stakeholders were invited and experts dispatched by ADRC gave
lectures.

Fig. 5-2-1-3 State of the Workshop

41

(4) Peer Review
ADRC has launched "ADRC Peer Review" since 2009 for further supporting the efforts forthe implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) in member countries, throughpromoting information sharing and strengthening the relations among member countries.
Peer Reviews are generally the evaluation and review of certain subjects by other professional
and technical people in the same field in order to appropriately maintain or enhance the qualityof the subjects from highly technical point of view. In the context of this project, it means thatexperts from the outside of the target country review and assess disaster risk reduction related
measures and policies of member countries for further promoting disaster risk reduction.
The aims of Peer Review are as follows.
‐

Contribution to the implementation of the HFA in the ADRC member countries‐

Information sharing and exchange of ideas among the ADRC member countries‐

Disaster risk reduction capacity development of the ADRC member countries
The Peer Review 2012 were conducted in Armenia for activities of disaster prevention

education and in Tajikistan for flood risk management. The outline of the Peer Review activities
is as follows.

1) Outline of Peer Review in Armenia< Themes for Reviews>
Activity of the Disaster Prevention Education in Armenia
The review was conducted based on country reports submitted by target country, as well as
on-site interview survey. The reviewer teams identified strengthens and weaknesses of the target
countries and then developed recommendations for further promoting disaster risk reduction in
the target country.
< Reviewer Team>‐

Prof. SAKURAI Aiko, Associate Professor, Graduate School of International Studies, Kobe University,
Japan (Team Leader)‐Prof. Vishnu DANGOL, Professor of Geology, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal‐

Mr. MORIWAKI Junji, Researcher, ADRC

<Accompanied Counterpart (Ministry of Emergency Situations (MES), Republic of Armenia) >‐Dr. Hrachya PETROSYAN, Head, National Survey for Seismic Protection (SSP) Agency‐

Prof. Sergey NAZARETYAN, Head, Northern Survey for Seismic Protection (NSSP) Agency‐

Mr. Serob DARBINYAN, Head, Western Survey for Seismic Protection (WSSP) Agency

42

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

Fig. 5-2-1-4 Inspection of Evacuation Drill

Fig.5-2-1-5 Workshop for Disaster Education

The reviewer team visited and conducted interview survey to the organizations which wasworking on disaster prevention education. Also, the team conducted inspections of classes in theschools and evacuation drills. Based on the country report submitted from SSP and the result of
the interview and the inspection survey, the team discussed for compiling a draft review reportwith all findings and recommendations. The summary of findings was introduced in theevaluation meeting on the last day of the survey. And the final review report was compiled
among review team members after returning from Armenia.
The outline of the final report is as follows.
<Advantages –based on observation and analysis>• Major stakeholders (SSP, local government, schools, UN organs and NGO, etc) related todisaster prevention education are involved in a process of formulating the seismic
protection behavior rule.
• The teaching materials for disaster prevention are enriched and are utilized in the schools.
• The person belonging to the military holds a full-time position in each school and manages
disaster prevention education and evacuation drill, which is well organized.
• By such measures, it functions well. (e.g. an evacuation route are posted in the schools, androles such as rescue teams at the time of the disaster are decided).
<Suggestions>• More systematic training (drills) modules might be required to respond to increasing
coverage of trainings by NSSP. Setting up target organizations and priority actions arerecommended.
• Standardized manual for evacuation should be distributed to schools for review. Thereafter
criteria for evacuation should be revised.
• Plan-Do-Check-Action cycle should be introduced to drills, to improve the quality of theevacuation drill.
• SSP should conduct monitoring and evaluation after the drills.

432) Outline of Peer Review in Tajikistan< Themes for Reviews>
Activity of the Disaster Risk Assessment in Tajikistan
The review was conducted based on country reports submitted by target country, as well as
on-site interview survey. The reviewer teams identified strengthens and weaknesses of the target
countries and then developed recommendations for further promoting disaster risk reduction in
the target country.
< Reviewer Team>‐

Prof. KOBAYASHI Kenichiro, Associate Professor, Research Center for Urban Safety andSecurity (RCUSS), Kobe University, Japan (Team Leader)‐

Mr. Prasong THAMMAPALA, Scientist, Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation,
Thailand‐Mr. MORIWAKI Junji, Researcher, ADRC

<Accompanied Counterpart (Committee for Emergency Situations (CoES), Tajikistan) >‐Mr. Alisho SHOMAHMADOV, Head, Information Management and Analytical Center(IMAC), Committee for Emergency Situations (CoES)

Fig. 5-2-1-5 Visit to Authority of Rudaki district

Fig. 5-2-1 -5

On-site visit to Ganjina vulnerable

The reviewer team visited and conducted interview survey to the organizations by the aboveschedule. Also, the team conducted on-site visit to the disaster vulnerable area. Based on the
country report submitted from CoES and the result of the interview and the on-site survey, theteam discussed for compiling a draft review report with all findings and recommendations. The
summary of findings was introduced in the workshop held on the last day of the survey. And thefinal review report was compiled among review team members after returning from Tajikistan.
The outline of the final report is as follows.

44

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

<Advantages –based on observation and analysis>• The Tajikistan professionals recognize disaster problems and understand the basic
mechanisms of the disaster. Some pilot projects, grass-root/community level activities havebrought good results for the disaster mitigation. For example, SCLUG/Focus has alreadyearned capacities to make hazard map for landslide and mudflow.
• The villagers vulnerable to natural disasters try to protect their properties by making the
mud control dam, mudflow diversion channels, etc. In other word, the villagers do
recognize the risks.
• According to the Rudaki District Office / Department of Geology, Tajik people band
together at the emergency situation. This is, according to them, the culture of Tajikistan.
Such positive attitude is the strength of Tajikistan.
• Multi stakeholders such as governmental organs, Tajik-friendly NGO, internationallycooperative universities/institutes have high potential to manage disaster risk.
<Suggestions>• To obtain recognition from international society as well as to collect fund from them,
Tajikistan should roughly estimate amount spending for non-structure measures. For
instance, budget for population survey and hazard map project. It’s because it is difficult forfund raisers to decide if they do unless an overall picture of budget is made up. In thistheory, Tajikistan should firstly focus on estimating budget calculation for non-structural
measures, as it costs a lot for structural measure such as bank enforcement.
• Making hazard maps, compiled by the hearing from SCLUG and Focus, is a matter ofurgent. In the later stage, more scientifically elaborated hazard map should be prepared.
• Currently main actors of hazard maps making and disaster education taking aredisaster-prone villages’ leaders. Involvement of children is recommended, since there was agood example in Japan tsunami-education to school children brought good result.
• Hazard map compiled by hearing is ad-hoc one, to upgrade it, scientific data collection(rainfall, land movement, river water level & discharge) should be made periodically, which
is an essential element for future observation.
• The exchange of views with meteorologist and hydrologist was not realized this time. The
meeting with them is valuable as the rainfall information is very important for rain-induced
mudflow and landslide disaster prevention.
• Periodical evacuation exercise should be done in every village.
• Tajikistan should give more opportunities of the higher education to young motivated Tajik
University students. This may, in future, reduce the operating cost relating to risk
assessment, hazard mapping, disaster education. Especially cost relating to jobs PC literary
is required. Well-educated Tajik younger generation will serve Government more diligently
than outside experts does.
• Past reviews should be examined carefully.
Recent management trend is so-called adaptive management such as PDCA cycle. If such45

reviews are incorporated into next planning, then further progress is expected.
• Materials to obtain better recognition from international society should be prepared. Morerecords, photos, statistical data, and documentation are included in the material. Release in
English also should be considered in the future.

46

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

5-2-2. Technical Cooperation Project for Strengthening the
Capacity of Seismic Disaster Risk Management in
Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia
5-2-2-1. Background
Mongolia, a landlocked country in East and Central Asia, whose population is 2.78 million,
GDP per citizen is 2,207USD and area is 1.56 million km2, is prone to some natural hazards
such as heavy rain, storm, and flood.
In Ulaanbaatar (hereinafter referred as “UB”), the capital of Mongolia, the number of unfelt
earthquakes has been increasing since 2005, especially its trend has been more obvious after
2009. A French research institute pointed out in 2010 that UB City and its suburbs are
surrounded by 4 faults including newly discovered ones which might cause the earthquakes ofMagnitude 7 (M7) level. Also according to the 2000 simulation by National Academy ofMongolia, it is predicted that approximately 300 buildings and 60,000 citizens would be affected
if the M7 level earthquake hits UB City.

5-2-2-2. Objective and outline
The objective of the project is tostrengthen the capacity for seismic disasterrisk management in UB City and to transfer
relevant skills and technologies to personnel
concerned with the Project. And remarkable
outcomes of the project are as follows;
1) Formulation of integrated seismic risk
Fig.5-2-2-1 MSK intensity of the Scenario 1

map for UB,

2) Revision of regional seismic disaster risk management plan,
3) Preparation of the draft construction guideline for middle-high storied building considering
seismic disaster risk resilient urban development and4) Capacity development of the relevant authorities and citizens in seismic disaster risk
management
Counterpart: UB City, Emergency Management Department of UB (EMDC)
Implementation period: February 2012 - October 2013

5-2-2-3. Outcome
1) Formulation of integrated seismic risk map for UB
Among the active faults in and around the UB city, two earthquake scenarios were set. A
deterministic method for ground motion evaluation was conducted under the maximum
earthquake estimated on the target fault.
(1) Scenario 1: The case of the Hustai fault earthquake (Mw7.6)(2) Scenario 2: Integrated maximum value of Emeelt fault (Mw7.0) and Gunjiin fault (Mw6.6)

47

Both in the cases of Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, in the city area of UB, the calculated MSK
scale seismic intensity are VIII-IV.
According to the calculated seismic intensity, damages of building, fire, road, bridges, andlifelines were estimated.
2) Revision of regional seismic disaster risk management plan
Earthquake Scenario is analyzed to understand what may happen and how to take actions orimplement countermeasures assuming earthquake occurs evening of winter consideringtiming of using fire for cooking and difficulty of emergency response. Scenario for
Emergency Management Headquarter, Search and Rescue, Medical Care, Evacuation, Foodand Drinking Water supply, Electricity Supply, Heating Water Supply, School Education,
Temporally and Permanent Housing Supply, Debris Treatment and Life Rehabilitation.
According to the scenarios, items needed to be revised were pointed out from the present
earthquake disaster prevention plan of UB city, and detail proposals for high priority items
were proposed.
3) Preparation of the draft construction guideline for middle-high storied building considering
seismic disaster risk resilient urban development
Following guideline was established by collaborationof PT and CP.
• Current issues• Target performance of buildings• Capacity evaluation of existing buildings• Upgrading measures• Promotion policy for upgrading• Suggestions
4) Capacity development of the relevant authorities andFig.5-2-2-2
Earthquake simulator by EMDC

citizens in seismic disaster risk management
The following activities were carried out in thisproject.
• Study meetings of hazard and risk assessment
methods• Training course in Japan• Study meetings of earthquake disaster management
for EMDC staffs• Earthquake

DisasterManagementawareness

activities WS• Earthquake Disaster Management awareness campaign

48

Fig.5-2-2-3
Earthquake Disaster
Management Awareness Campaign

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

5-2-3 Technical Cooperation Project in Indonesia
5-2-3-1. Background of the ProjectIndonesia is a disaster prone country which is frequently affected by various types of natural
disasters, such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and Tsunamis. Examples of such disasters andresulting damage in recent years are: the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami in December
2004 and the Java earthquake in May 2006. These disasters have raised the awareness on theimportance of disaster management. The government of Indonesia, upon these occasions,enacted Law No. 24 on Disaster Management in 2007, and strengthened the disastermanagement systems of the country through establishing the BNPB (National Agency for
Disaster Management).
However, BNPB, which has only a short history, does not have an adequate organization
structure, budget, skills, knowhow or staff, and it is difficult for BNPB to give directions or
sufficiently support the local governments in establishing BPBD (the Regional Agency for
Disaster Management) or in formulating the Regional Disaster Management Plans. Additionally,
although each local government proceeds with establishing its own BPBD as a permanent main
agency in case of disaster, the effective activities do not seem realistic since their knowledge andexperience on disaster management are lacking.
Against this background, the JICA Technical Cooperation Project “the Project forEnhancement of the Disaster Management Capacity of BNPB and BPBD” was formulated witha goal of enhancing the disaster management capacity of BNPB, provincial BPBDs in North
Sulawesi and West Nusa Tenggara provinces, and regency/municipality BPBDs in bothprovinces for reducing damage from disasters in Indonesia.
The ADRC with the Oriental Consultants Co., Ltd, a partner agency was commissioned the
Project and started the project activities based on the proposal from November 2011.

49

5-2-3-2. Outline of the Project
The outline of the project is as shown in the below table.
【Project Period】
November 2011 – December 2015 (4 years)【Project Purpose】
Enhancement of the disaster management capacities of BNPB, the provincial BPBDs,
and the regency/municipality BPBDs in the pilot area
【Project Target Areas】
1. Jakarta (BNPB), 2. provincial BPBD of North Sulawesi province andregency/municipality BPBDs within it, 3. provincial BPBD of West Nusa Tenggara
province and those of its regencies/municipalities.
【Expected Outputs】[Output 1]: Improvement of the capacity for the regency/municipality BPBDs toaccumulate disaster data/information that is fundamental for disaster risk
management and improvement of the accuracy of such data/information.
[Output 2]: Creation of Hazard and Risk Maps at the regency/municipality level in thepilot area.
[Output

3]:

FormulationofRegional

DisasterManagement

Plans

for

regency/municipalities in the pilot area.
[Output 4]: Disaster Management Drills are to be conducted in the pilot provinces aswell as in regencies/municipalities in the pilot provinces
From the ADRC, the experts on “Disaster Information System” for Output 1 and “Community
Based Disaster Risk Management” for Output 4 have joined the activities.

50

5. Promoting Cooperation with Member Countries, International Organizations and NGOs

5-2-4 Technical Cooperation Project in the Philippines
5-2-4-1. Background of the Project
The Republic of the Philippines has made substantial efforts for strengthening disaster risk
management including of the development of Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk
Reduction (2009-2019) after the adoption of Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 in the
WCDR held on January 2005.
In recent years, the Philippine Government has been shifting the approach to disaster risk
management from “Post Disaster Response” to “Proactive Disaster Management,” which is anapproach that focuses on mitigation and preparedness. The “Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Act of 2010 (RA No. 10121)” was enacted in May 2010, creating the legal
framework to implement a new approach to disaster management called Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management (DRRM). Under the DRRM Act, the NDCC (National Disaster Coordinating
Council), the highest decision-making body related to disaster management on the national level,
was reorganized as the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC)
and the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) was appointed as the secretariat of the council and thecentral and leading organization for DRRM activities.
In order to implement the DRRM activities under the new approach, the needs for preparing
the various plans as well as strengthening the capabilities of related organizations are rapidly
increasing. The OCD is also facing challenges in organizational and human resource capabilities
enhancement.
Against this background, the JICA Technical Cooperation Project “The Disaster Risk
Reduction and Management Capacity Enhancement Project” was formulated with a goal ofstrengthening capacity on DRRM of OCD. The ADRC has participated in the project as asupport organization and provided technical cooperation activities based on the proposal fromMarch 2012.

51

5-2-4-2. Outline of the Project
The outline of the project is as shown in the below table.
【Project Period】
March 2012 – February 2015 (3 years)【Project Purpose】
Capacity on DRRM of OCD is strengthened【Project Target Areas】
Metropolitan Manila (National Government) and some pilot areas (2-3 areas)【Expected Outputs】[Output 1]: Planning and implementing capacity of OCD on DRRM is strengthened.
[Output 2]: DRRM activities including information management are standardized.
[Output 3]: Human resources development plan for DRRM is developed.
[Output 4]: Support system to Community Based Disaster Risk Reduction andManagement (CBDRRM) is strengthened.
The ADRC has dispatched the expert on “Human Resource Development and Planning” forOutput 3 for the Project.

52