Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan, Second Edition
Japan is one of the most volcanic countries on earth with more than 100 active volcanoes. Many scenic tourist destinations
and hot spring resorts are located near active volcanoes, and residential areas have been approaching the volcanic summits.
This has made it urgent for local governments and disaster mitigation organizations adjacent to active volcanoes toimplement effective disaster management systems for dealing with volcanic threats. After the eruption of Unzen Fugendakein 1991, the National Land Agency of Japan published a national guideline for volcanic eruption disaster hazard maps basedon lessons learned from casualties caused by the disastrous eruption of Nevado del Ruiz in South America in 1985. This wasfollowed by publications of volcanic hazard maps (disaster mitigation maps) as well as disaster mitigation plans by many
local governments adjacent to volcanic areas. Efforts to update volcanic hazard maps and prepare other refuge handbooks
were stepped up significantly after Usuzan and Miyakejima erupted in 2000.
Meanwhile, the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters of the Volcanological Society of Japan (VSJ) had been
investigating effective methods for developing the best suited mitigating systems for volcanic disasters in Japan. Also, theDisaster Information Laboratory of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED) had
been working on efficient ways to collect and disseminate disaster prevention related materials and information resources.
Working together, these two organizations developed a volcanic hazard map database that provides basic information
resources to local government authorities, disaster mitigation organizations, and researchers who are concerned withvolcanic hazards. After building on these collaborations, the first edition of the Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan (on twoDVDs) was published in 2006, followed by an English supplemental DVD (on a single disk) in 2007. In addition, the NIED
made the database system of volcanic hazard maps widely available to the public by putting up an online version on theirwebsite, which they regularly update as new information becomes available. Since the first edition of the Volcanic Hazard
Maps of Japan was published six years ago, the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) has revised the number of active
volcanoes upward from 108 to 110, and the new Volcanic Warning and Volcanic Alert Levels System has been incorporated
into many areas near active volcanoes. Several hazard maps have therefore been revised by local governments, andnumerous publications with new information have been published.
One valuable lesson we learned from the recent Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011 is that we must be
prepared to respond to major natural disasters no matter how infrequent and unlikely, and we must deal with such disasters
as a national challenge and not simply rely on local governments and local disaster management organizations. In order toimplement a wide-area disaster management system that can handle these kinds of large-scale disasters, we must bolster hardcountermeasures with soft countermeasures while continuing to explore other novel ways of thinking. Indeed, reassessmentof how people should respond to disasters based on these new ways of thinking has already begun.
Taking this into consideration, the second edition of Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan was planned and has now beenreleased with new updated content, based on recent studies and reviews by national agencies, disaster management
organizations and commissions, and local governments, some of which have faced volcanic threats in the recent past.
We have tried to incorporate a great deal of new data about the current state of disaster management and future disastermitigation efforts into this second edition. By including the latest version of volcanic hazard maps and other relevant
information resources, we hope that the recent initiatives and information coming out from local governments, other relevantorganizations and agencies, media organizations, volcanologists and disaster mitigation scientists will be put to widespreaduse in developing even better ways of mitigating volcanic disasters in Japan.
Finally, we would like to express our appreciation to the members of the Disaster Information Laboratory, NIED, and theCommission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters of VSJ for publishing this paper.
Yoichi Nakamura, Toshikazu Tanada, and Shigeo Aramaki
March 2013

CONTENTS
Challenges of Dealing with Large-Scale Volcanic Disasters .................................................................................. 93
Shigeo ARAMAKIVolcano Disaster Prevention Work of the Cabinet Office ........................................................................................ 95
Hideaki FUJIYAMA, Shinichi TOKUMOTO, Kiyotaka KOCHI, and Toshiki SHIMBARU
The Japan Meteorological Agencyʼs Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives ...................................................... 101
Hitoshi YAMASATO, Jun FUNASAKI, and Yasunobu TAKAGIVolcanic Ash Advisories ........................................................................................................................................ 109
Shomei SHIRATO
The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions
and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation ........................................................................................ 113
Toshitsugu FUJII
Actions for Volcanic Disaster Management........................................................................................................... 121
Shinji YAMAGUCHITechnical Efforts to Prepare Volcanic Hazard Maps ............................................................................................. 125
Nobuo ANYOJI
Volcanic Disaster Measures of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan ..................................................... 129
Tetsuro IMAKIIRE
Observation of Volcanoes in the Seas around Japan by the Japan Coast Guard .................................................... 133
Koji ITO
AISTʼs Research on Volcanology .......................................................................................................................... 137
Hiroshi SHINOHARA and Yoshihiro ISHIZUKAFire and Disaster Management Agency and Local Government
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures .................................................................................................................. 141
Hirobumi KOBAYASHI and Noriko URATA
Volcanic Disaster Management at Unzendake ....................................................................................................... 143
Shinichi SUGIMOTO
Practical Example of the Use of a Volcano Hazard Map in 2000 Eruption of the Usu Volcano ............................ 149
Toshiya TANABE
Problems Associated with Activity Assessment, Dissemination of Information,
and Disaster Response During the 2000 Eruption of Miyakejima..................................................................... 155
Hidefumi WATANABE
Volcano Disaster Mitigation Research Initiatives at National ResearchInstitute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention .......................................................................................... 161
Toshikazu TANADA and Motoo UKAWA
Japanʼs Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives: Activities of the Commission
on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the Volcanological Society of Japan ........................................................ 165
Yoichi NAKAMURA, Shigeo ARAMAKI, and Eisuke FUJITA

Explanation of“Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan – Second Edition”................................................................... 173
Yayoi HOTTA, Hinako SUZUKI, Katsue SAWAI, and Toshikazu TANADA
List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material .................................................................... 176
Location Map on Volcanoes ................................................................................................................................ 186

APPENDIX : 2 DVD-ROMs
Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan, Second Edition
Vol. 1 : No.1

Shiretoko-Iozan– No. 45 Asamayama

Vol. 2 : No.47 Niigata-Yakeyama – No. 97 SuwanosejimaTechnical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Challenges of Dealing with Large-Scale Volcanic Disasters
Shigeo ARAMAKI*

Japan has not made much progress in dealing withlarge-scale volcanic eruptions that wreak devastation
across several prefectures, and as we just witnessed in
the Great East Asia Earthquake in March 2011, this is achallenge of great urgency. Indeed, we have been rather
slow to mount a comprehensive response even in the faceof relatively small volcanic disasters. It would be a verysignificant development if we could come up with a viable
scheme for dealing with large-scale volcanic disasters
across an extensive area, for of course this would enable
us to deal with the whole range of volcanic hazards. The
biggest failing of disaster management personnel at the
local level is their inability to envision a volcanic disasterin concrete detail. This lack of vision can be attributed
to the fact that very few people have really experienced
a volcano first hand, and the fact that there is far greater
range of physical volcanic disaster models compared withother kinds of natural disasters. In order to get beyond thislack of vision, it is absolutely essential to move experts—
mainly volcanologists—into positions of authority inorganizations that deal with volcanic hazard mitigationand management. Unfortunately, the government officials
sitting on these councils and other organizations are
only dimly aware of the necessity and importance of
volcano experts, so the experts tend to be marginalized.
Involvement and input from the volcanologists must be
vigorously encouraged at the national level, the prefecturallevel, and the municipal level. In order to deal effectively
with large-scale volcanic hazards, it is necessary to bring
together different administrative entities and organize
some kind of joint disaster management headquarters.
Again, the volcanologists should be the key players ingathering and assessing data about volcanic activity,

while offering reports and advice to the administrative
personnel. For their part, seismologists and volcanologists
must learn how to work within disaster management
organizations, so that they know who to talk to andwho they should offer their information and advice to.
Volcanologists involved in basic research tend to beuninterested in this kind of administrative activity, or
think that they lack the basic skills and knowledge to playsuch a role. But considering how poorly informed mostworking-level disaster managers are regarding volcanic
activity, basic science volcanologists must get directly
involved so they can explain and assess what is going on
and offer advice to their less-knowledgeable colleagues.
Volcanic activity has very different characteristics fromearthquakes and other types of natural disasters. For all its
devastation, the Great Tohoku-Kanto Earthquake of March2011 was a wakeup call. It woke people up to the urgencyof establishing effective countermeasures to deal withmajor volcanic disasters. Following the Tohoku-Kanto
earthquake, three prefectures—Shizuoka, Yamanashi,
and Kanagawa—banded together and organized acountermeasures council to consider what to do in theevent of a large-scale eruption of Mount Fuji. Here we will
discuss the range of activities and just what these onsite
joint countermeasure headquarters do. This promises tobe a very substantive discussion that will go into somedepth about the actual state of volcanoes and eruptions.
There are many major volcanoes straddling prefecturesthat cut across jurisdictional boundaries in Japan, yet so
far there has been very little progress in setting up joint
inter-prefectural conferences to think through and develop
effective countermeasures. Clearly we must pursue thisapproach in the years ahead.

* Yamanashi Institute of Environmental Sciences－ 93 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcano Disaster Prevention Work of the Cabinet OfficeHideaki FUJIYAMA*, Shinichi TOKUMOTO*, Kiyotaka KOCHI*, and Toshiki SHIMBARU*

1. Introduction

Our country, the volcanic islands of which are among
the world’s most famous, has suffered from volcano
disasters since the dawn of history. Over the past decade,volcano disasters such as the eruptions and volcanic
activity of Unzen-Fugendake from 1990 to 1995 andthe eruptions of Usuzan and Miyakejima in 2000 havecaused great damage to people and property. In 2011,
Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) resumed full-scalevolcanic activity for the first time in about 300 years.
To prevent these volcano disasters, the central
government has designated areas with volatile volcanoes
as areas requiring emergency provision of refuge facilities
under the Act on Special Measures for Active Volcanoes.
The central government is thus supporting local
government projects (improvement of roads or ports andof shelter and other evacuation facilities) in the designatedareas. As part of its efforts during non-emergency periods,
in 1992 the Disaster Prevention Bureau of the National
Land Agency developed “principles for drafting mapsthat forecast dangerous areas at the time of a volcanic
eruption.” Under these principles, preparation of volcano
hazard maps has been promoted.
After the reorganization of the central government,
the Cabinet Office, which was established to plan andcoordinate important issues related to ensuring public
safety (such as disaster prevention), took over volcano
disaster countermeasure operations. In 2000, the Officeestablished the Fujisan Volcano Disaster Management
Council and, in collaboration with related prefecturaland municipal governments and government agencies,
prepared a Fujisan Hazard Map following low-frequency
earthquakes directly under the mountain. In addition, theOffice’s Central Disaster Management Council developed
basic policies that should be followed by central and local
government in the event of an eruption of Fujisan.
As described above, the Cabinet Office develops
the policies for volcano disaster countermeasures inour country. It also works on measures to improve andstrengthen these countermeasures under the policies, incollaboration with related ministries and agencies.

2. Establishment of a Volcano Disaster Management System for Each Volcano

The important thing for volcano disaster countermeasures is to implement entry restriction and evacuation
beforehand in areas predicted to be at risk from the volcanic phenomena associated with an eruption (e.g. ballistic
projectiles, pyroclastic flows, and snowmelt and volcanic
mudflows). To achieve this, it is necessary to establish asystem in which suitable eruption alerts can be announced
to residents and the residents can be evacuated immediately and smoothly.
In 2006 and 2007, the Cabinet Office and other relevant
agencies held meetings to commission a review of disastermanagement countermeasures on the basis of volcanic
information. The aim was to investigate essential factors
for establishing an effective evacuation system for use
during the eruption of each volcano. Under the Policy
on Volcano Management Related to Evacuation in the
Event of an Eruption (the Policy) compiled at the meeting,relevant ministries and agencies, including the Cabinet
Office, are working jointly to establish a volcano disastermanagement system. The details of their efforts are
introduced below (Fig. 1).
2.1 Establishment of Volcano Disaster Management Councils and Formation of Core Groups

Volcanoes are often sited at the boundaries of several
municipalities or prefectures. For this reason, the relevant
prefectural and municipal governments need to implement
consistent evacuation measures so as not to interferewith the residents’ evacuation in the event of an eruption.
Consequently, the prefectural and municipal governments
and relevant agencies and authorities must share
information during non-emergency periods and establish
Volcano Disaster Management Councils for the joint studyof evacuation measures. To run disaster management
conferences, prefectural governments must collaborate
with the relevant agencies and authorities.
Core groups, which consist of prefectural and local
government officials, meteorological observatory
personnel, the Sabo (Soil Erosion Control) Department andvolcanologists deeply involved in establishing evacuation
timing and areas, play an important role in allowing* Disaster Management. Cabinet Office－ 95 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcano Disaster Management Systems to be Established
for Individual Volcanoes㻌㻌㻌Volcano Disaster Management
Councils㻌When is thesituation dangerous?
ᴾ

Eruption scenarios

Joint Review by Core Group*㻌
Consisting of prefectural and local government officials,
㻌meteorological observatory personnel, the Sabo (Soil Erosion
Control) Department, and volcanologists
When is the situation
dangerous?
What area is dangerous?
ᴾ

What area isdangerous?

When and from where
do residents escape?

㻌Volcanic alert levels

To where and how ᴾ
do residents escape?

ᴾ

ᴾ

Evacuation plans

Volcano hazard maps㻌
Establish a face-to-face relationship to share images 㻌of disaster prevention[Members of the Council]
Prefectural and municipal governments; central government's local branch offices,
epartments, and bureaus (regional and local meteorological observatories, regional
development bureaus and Sabo offices, regional forest offices and district forest offices,
regional survey departments, regional environment offices, ranger offices, coastguard
headquarters, etc.); Self-Defense Forces; prefectural police; fire services; members of theCoordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and other volcanologists;
designated local public institutions that run transportation, communications, electricity, gas
and other public services; medical and health experts; Japanese Red Cross Society, etc.

Familiarizationof residents

ᴾ

Volcano disastermanagement maps
Disaster reduction
drills and exercises

Fig. 1 Volcano disaster management systems to be established for individual volcanoes.

such conferences to examine evacuation measures in an
efficient manner.
2.2 Eruption Scenarios, Volcano Hazard Maps, and Volcanic Alert Levels

In any examination of evacuation in the event ofan eruption, core groups need to take the initiative indeveloping several eruption scenarios and preparing
volcano hazard maps that indicate the likely areas affectedby the eruption. Gradual evacuation in response todifferent scales of eruption requires several volcano hazard
maps to be prepared according to each scale.
By mapping a variety of eruption phenomena (ballistic
projectiles, pyroclastic flows, and snowmelt and volcanic
mudflows), the volcano hazard maps point out danger
areas that are at risk of eruption phenomena. The maps
form a basis for volcano disaster countermeasures.
By preparing eruption scenarios and volcano hazard
maps, the Volcano Disaster Management Councils’ related
agencies and authorities can share information on thelikely areas affected by an assumed disaster in each phaseof volcanic activity. They can also determine the timing
criteria for disaster prevention measures (e.g. road andtrail regulation, or issuances of evacuation preparation
information and evacuation orders and advisories). The
disaster countermeasure criteria that are agreed to by
the Volcano Disaster Management Councils are used todetermine the volcanic alert levels that will trigger disastercountermeasures.
In response to an increase in volcanic alert levels, theagencies and authorities can take disaster countermeasuresin an immediate and smooth manner. This should help toreduce the extent of volcano disasters.
2.3 Drafting of Specific and Practical Evacuation Plans

For a volcano with a certain volcanic alert levels, alevel in the “alert” range (e.g. between 4 and 5) implies
that certain areas must be evacuated. On the basis of thisrange, specific and practical evacuation plans for residents
in the relevant areas are developed. Information includes
when residents evacuate, from where they evacuate, who
evacuates, to where they evacuate, and how they evacuate.
It is necessary to identify residents (including people
requiring assistance during a disaster) in evacuation
areas and to then draft specific and practical evacuationplans that will enable immediate evacuation. The plans－ 96 －

Volcano Disaster Prevention Work of the Cabinet Office — H. FUJIYAMA et al.

need to consider a variety of phenomena in the event ofan eruption (e.g. earthquakes associated with volcanic
activity, traffic congestion caused by evacuation in cars,and evacuation means, routes, and times).
To familiarize residents with the need for evacuation, it
is also necessary to prepare volcano disaster management
maps. These maps will include the disaster prevention
information required for volcano hazard maps (e.g.
descriptions of eruption alerts, evacuation centers androutes, evacuation methods, and how to disseminate
disaster information to residents) and will be based on thedetails of the evacuation plans that have been developed.
It will also be necessary to execute disaster reduction
drills and exercises based on the evacuation plans and tovalidate the evacuation plans on the basis of the results ofthe drills.
2.4 System of Experts in Volcano Disaster Management

Volcanic disasters occur at a lower frequency than othernatural disasters. Only a few prefectural and municipal
governments have suffered volcano disasters, and there
are only small numbers of staffers across Japan thathave experience in working in disaster prevention in theevent of an eruption. Therefore, in July 2009 the Cabinet
Office initiated a system of experts in volcano disastermanagement. The Office designates as experts in volcano
disaster management those staff members in prefecturaland municipal governments who have taken the initiativein responding to volcano disasters in recent years. These
members support the drafting of disaster countermeasuresin volcanic areas.
3. Support for Establishment of a Disaster Management
SystemAs a result of the Cabinet Office’s survey, however, it
has become obvious that volcano disaster countermeasures
under the Policy are not being implemented as smoothly
as desired. Prefectural and municipal governments andthe Volcano Disaster Management Councils need various
types of support from the central government and relevant
agencies (e.g. manuals and advice). The state of disastercountermeasure efforts for different volcanoes as ofJanuary 2013 is shown in Table 1.

Table 1 State of efforts to implement disaster countermeasures for 47 volcanoes.

State of efforts for disaster management countermeasures for 47 volcanoes
State of efforts for disaster management countermeasures for 47 volcanoes requiring strengthening and improvementof monitoring and observation systems (selected by the Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions)
Name ofvolcanoAtosanupuri
Meakandake
Taisetsuzan
Tokachidake
Tarumaesan
KuttaraUsuzanHokkaido-Komagatake
Esan
IwakisanAkita-Yakeyama
IwatesanAkita-Komagatake
Chokaisan
Kurikomayama
ZaozanAzumayama
Adatarayama
Bandaisan
Nasudake
Nikko-Shiranesan
Kusatsu-Shiranesan
Asamayama
Niigata-Yakeyama

Drafting of
Establishmentof Volcanic Establishment Introduction specific andof volcanic
practical
Disasterof volcano
Management hazard maps alert levels evacuationplans
Councils

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿

Name ofvolcanoDrafting of
Establishmentof Volcanic Establishment Introduction specific andof volcanic
practical
Disasterof volcano
Management hazard maps alert levels evacuationplans
Councils

䕿

䕿

䕿

䕿

䕿

䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿

䕿

䕿

KujusanAsosanUnzendake
Kirishimayama
Sakurajima
Satsuma-Iojima
Kuchinoerabujima
Suwanosejima

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿

Total

25

37

29

2

Yakedake
Norikuradake
Ontakesan
Hakusan
Fujisan
Hakoneyama
Izu-Tobu Volcanoes
Izu-Oshima
NiijimaKozushima
Miyakejima
Hachijojima
Aogashima
Ioto
Tsurumidake and Garandake

䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿

䕿
䕿
䕿

Twenty-five volcanoes established Volcanic Disaster Management Councils.
Thirty-seven volcanoes established volcano hazard maps.

－ 97 －

Twenty-nine volcanoes introdued volcanic alert levels.
Two volcanoes drafted specific and practical evacuation plans.

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

For this reason, the Cabinet Office clearly indicated theneed to establish Volcano Disaster Management Councils
in the Basic Disaster Management Plan that was revisedin December 2011. Furthermore, during the period fromJanuary 2011 to March 2012, a Review Committee for the
Promotion of Disaster Management Measures was createdto help further promote volcano disaster countermeasures.
The committee discussed possible assistance measuresthat could be taken by the central government in orderto promote the development of evacuation plans, thepreparation of volcano hazard map, the establishment ofVolcano Disaster Management Councils, and revitalizationof the Councils.
3.1 Guide for Drafting of Specific and Practical Evacuation Plans in the Event of an Eruption

Following the eruption of Kirishimayama(Shinmoedake) in January 2011, the central government
dispatched to Miyazaki and Kagoshima prefectures agovernment assistance team that consisted of staff fromrelevant agencies and authorities. Guidelines for thedrafting of evacuation plans in the event of volcanic
eruptions and sediment disasters were also prepared(described later).
On the basis of these guidelines, the review committee
analyzed and collated issues and important points tobe noted when the evacuation plans were drafted. It
prepared a Guide to Drafting Specific and Practical
Evacuation Plans in the Event of Eruptions and other
Natural Phenomena (Inland Volcano and Island Volcano
Editions) (“the Guide”). This acts as a manual for thedrafting of evacuation plans in the event of eruptions of
any of the volcanoes across the country, in reference tothe evacuation plans that have already been prepared for
Sakurajima, Shinmoedake, and other active volcanoes.
Since the start of fiscal year 2012, the Cabinet Officehas been helping prefectural and municipal governments
to draft evacuation plans on the basis of the Guide and incooperation with the relevant agencies and authorities.
3.2 Policy for Preparation of Volcano Disaster Management Maps

Preparation of volcano hazard maps has been promoted
so far under “principles for drafting maps that forecast
dangerous areas at the time of a volcanic eruption.” This
policy was developed by the Review Committee forDisaster Management Measures (Secretariat: Disaster
Prevention Bureau, National Land Agency) in 1992.
However, there are some volcanoes for which hazard maps
have still not been prepared. To promote the developmentof these maps, it has been decided that this 20-year-old
policy should be revised on the basis of new findings
about volcano disaster management and volcanology.

In addition, the Policy for Preparing Volcano Disaster
Management Maps was developed in 2012. The aimof the policy is to determine whether existing volcano
hazard maps are effective for preparing evacuationplans and also to promote the development of volcano
disaster management maps that can be utilized in actual
evacuations.
3.3 Meetings of Volcano Disaster Management Councils

Volcano Disaster Management Councils form a basis
for the review of measures for evacuation in the face of
eruptions of different volcanoes, but establishment of thecouncils has not been promoted. Some existing Volcano
Disaster Management Councils do not promote the review
of evacuation measures. This is because Council meetings
are not held often, or because the Councils do not form
core groups or do not have input from volcanologists.
Therefore, since fiscal year 2012, representatives ofCouncils for different volcanoes and prefectural andmunicipal governments in volcanic areas have gathered at
the Meetings for Volcano Disaster Management Councils.
Through discussions and the exchange of opinions,information, and the issues confronting Volcano Disaster
Management Councils, the meetings aim to promote theestablishment and revitalization of these Councils.
4. Support in the Event of an Eruption
4.1 Establishment of Major Disaster Management Headquarters

In the event of a large-scale volcano disaster, thecentral government will establish a Headquarters for
Major Disaster Management, headed by a Minister, in
accordance with the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act.
For liaison and coordination with relevant agencies andlocal municipalities, or for the immediate establishmentof a local disaster response system, if required, the central
government will set up a local disaster managementbase to take countermeasures. In the event of an unusualand severe volcano disaster, the government will set
up a Headquarters for Extreme Disaster Managementthat is headed by the Prime Minister. If required, theHeadquarters for Extreme Disaster Management will
also establish a local extreme disaster management basefor countermeasures. In the event of any disaster not
requiring a Headquarters for Major Disaster Management,
the government may set up a local organization (local
liaison base) and take measures in coordination with local
relevant agencies.
In the event of the eruption of Usuzan in 2000, theUsuzan Local Liaison and Coordination Conference was
set up in response to information announced by the Japan
Meteorological Agency immediately before the eruption.

－ 98 －

Volcano Disaster Prevention Work of the Cabinet Office — H. FUJIYAMA et al.

A Headquarters for Major Disaster Management and local
disaster management base were set up after subsequent
eruptions of the mountainIn the event of the eruption of a volcano, support for
projects related to emergency provision of refuge facilities,
removal of volcanic ash and minimization of ash damage,and improvement of agricultural facilities for disasterprevention and farming facilities is provided under the Act
on Special Measures for Active Volcanoes.
Areas designated under the Act as requiring the
emergency provision of refuge facilities can receive
financial support for the establishment and improvementof facilities required for immediate evacuation of residents(improvement or construction of roads or ports, squares
and shelters; and fire-proofing and ruggedization ofschools and community centers).
Municipalities designated under the Act as requiring
removal of volcanic ash can receive financial support for
improving or establishing facilities for removing volcanic
ash and for educational and social welfare facilities.
In the event of the eruption of Kirishimayama(Shinmoedake) in 2011, the central government designatedaffected areas as those requiring emergency provision of
refuge facilities and those requiring removal of volcanicash. It conducted various projects based on the designationof the relevant areas.

In light of these circumstances, the central government
dispatched to both Miyazaki and Kagoshima prefectures agovernment assistance team of relevant agency officials to
help deal with the eruption. The government reestablished
the Volcano Disaster Management Council (Core Member
Conference for Kirishima Volcano Disaster Management
Liaison Committees; Miyazaki and Kagoshima prefectures
as the secretariat) as a system in which the central
government’s local agencies, as well as the prefecturaland municipal governments and the volcanologists,
jointly examined the residents’ evacuation in an integrated
manner. Furthermore, the government compiled
Guidelines for Drafting Evacuation Plans in the Event of
the Eruption of Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake). On thebasis of these guidelines, evacuation plans in relation topyroclastic flows and ballistic projectiles were developed
for the town of Takahara in Miyazaki Prefecture and thecity of Kirishima in Kagoshima Prefecture. Evacuationplans in relation to sediment disasters from volcanic ash
were developed for the city of Miyakonojo in Miyazaki
Prefecture. All of these plans were developed through joint
review by the Volcano Disaster Management Council.
Experts in volcano disaster management weredispatched to Takaharu and Miyakonojo in Miyazaki
Prefecture. They held an explanatory meeting with local
residents to disseminate information and educate thepublic about sediment disasters, for example in relation to
the debris flows associated with rain after ash fall.

4.3 Response in the Case of the Eruption of Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) in 2011

5. Future Movements

Full-scale volcanic activity occurred at Shinmoedakein Kirishimayama in January 2011. Volcano hazard
maps had already been prepared, and volcanic alertlevels had been introduced for the mountain. However,specific and practical evacuation plans had still not beendeveloped. Because of the continuous explosive eruptionof Shinmoedake, an evacuation advisory was issued toareas 8 to 12 km from the crater (1,158 people in 513
households), although the volcanic alert level was 3(regulated entry within a distance of 3 km from the crater).
There was a discrepancy between the meteorologicalobservatories’ responses to this volcano disaster and themunicipalities’ responses.

The Cabinet Office will continue to support efforts
to establish disaster management systems for individual
volcanoes. The relevant Review Committee for the
Promotion of Disaster Management Measures has
collated data on those issues that occur in any large-scalevolcano disasters and that cannot be dealt with within theframework of the Volcano Disaster Management Councils
alone. This includes volcano disasters that greatly andbroadly affect society in the long term. On the basis of thisreview, at the start of fiscal year 2012 the Cabinet Officeand other related agencies created a Committee to Review
Wide-ranging Disaster Management Measures and havebeen examining specific disaster countermeasures.

4.2 Support under the Act on Special Measures for Active
Volcanoes－ 99 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

The Japan Meteorological Agency’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives
Hitoshi YAMASATO*, Jun FUNASAKI*, and Yasunobu TAKAGI*

1. Active Volcanoes in Japan

Japan is one of the most volcanic countries in the world,and has suffered many volcanic disasters in the past. In
Japan, the definition of active volcanoes by the Japan
Meteorological Agency (JMA) and the Coordinating
Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions (CCPVE:
private advisory body to the Director-General of the JMA
that was established by the volcanic eruption prediction
plan: Fujii, 2013) is widely used. According to this definition, there are 110 active volcanoes in Japan (see Figure1). The definition of active volcanoes has fluctuated over
the years, but in 2003 the JMA defined active volcanoes
in Japan as "volcanoes which have erupted within 10,000
years or volcanoes with vigorous fumarolic activity"(Yamasato, 2007).

Active volcanoes range widely in the degree of activity- they exhibit from constant eruptive displays such as
one sees at Sakurajima to volcanoes that are relatively
quiescent over long periods. This led the CCPVE to refine
the 2003 definition of active volcano (until then defined
as a volcano that had erupted within 2,000 years) into
three ranks—A, B, and C—depending on degree of past
volcanological activity. Because this ranking is based on
degree of volcanic activity in the past, it may not reflecteminence of eruption or the potential impact on society orneed to respond to volcanic disasters. The CCPVE thus
followed up with a project to identify volcanoes that could
erupt over the next 100 years, that call for close monitoring and observation to mitigate any potential impact
on society, and in 2009 they came up with a list of 47
Atosanupuri
Shiretoko-Iozan
Tenchozan

Sapporo VOIC
YoteisanNisekoUsuzanNansei Islands
Io-Torishima
Hokkaido-Komagatake
Esan
Oshima-Oshima
IwakisanSubmarine Volcano
Akita-Yakeyama
NNE of Iriomotejima
Akita-Komagatake
Chokaisan
MyokosanHijiori
Kusatsu-Shiranesan
ZaozanNiigata-Yakeyama
Hiuchigatake
Numazawa
Midagahara
Yakedake
Fukuoka VOIC
Akandanayama
Norikuradake
SanbesanHakusan
Ontakesan
Abu Volcanoes

Rishirizan
Taisetsuzan
Tokachidake

Unzendake
Fukue volcanoes
Yonemaru andSumiyoshiike
Ikeda and Yamagawa
Kaimondake
Satsuma-Iojima
Kuchinoerabujima
Kuchinoshima
Nakanoshima
Suwanosejima

Yokodake
Tsurumidake and Garandake
Yufudake
AsosanFujisanKujusanKozushima
Hakoneyama
Kirishimayama
Mikurajima
Wakamiko
Izu-Tobu Volcanoes
Sakurajima

Etorofu-Atosanupuri
Chirippusan
Rausudake Ruruidake
Moyorodake

Izu-Oshima
ToshimaNiijimaMiyakejima
Hachijojima
Aogashima

Maruyama
Eniwadake
Osorezan Tarumaesan

Hakkodasan Kuttara
TowadaHachimantai
IwatesanKurikomayama
NarukoSendai VOIC
Azumayama
Adatarayama
Bandaisan
Nasudake
Takaharayama
Nikko-Shiranesan
AkagisanHarunasan
Asamayama

Tokyo VOIC

: Active Volcano (110 volcanoes): Volcanoes whose volcanic activity is constantly monitored
24 hours a day (47 volcanoes).
Volcano 㸸 Volcanoes for which volcanic alert levels are currently
nameprovided (29 volcanoes) as of April 2012.
VOIC 㸸 Volcanic Observation and Information Center

Fig. 1 Japan's active volcanoes and volcano monitoring system.
* Volcanological Division, Seismological and Volcanological Department, Japan Meteorological Agency－ 101 －

Mashu
Oakandake
Meakandake

Sashiusudake
Odamoisan
Etorofu-Yakeyama
Berutarubesan
Chachadake
RaususanTomariyama

㻱㻝㻠㻜㼻

㻱㻝㻠㻠㼻

Beyonesu (Beyonnaise) Rocks
Sumisujima(Smith Rocks)
Izu-Torishima
Sofugan

㻺㻟㻞㼻

㻺㻞㻤㼻

Nishinoshima
Kaikata Seamount
Kaitoku Seamount
Funka Asane
Ioto
Kita-Fukutokutai
Fukutoku-Oka-no-Ba㻺㻞㻠㼻Minami-Hiyoshi
Seamount
Nikko SeamountTechnical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013volcanoes that met these new criteria. The JMA’s constantmonitoring system has been in effect to the present day,and we will describe this system in detail which is basedon this same list of 47 active volcanoes. In light of the factthat the volcanoes on this watch list were selected basedon different criteria than the rank system and that many of
the 47 were classified as Rank C volcanoes in 2003, theJMA no longer uses the older ranking system.

for research purposes, and conduct research with the goalof refining eruption prediction capabilities. This paper
will be primarily concerned with the JMA’s Volcanic
Monitoring System.
The JMA had kept a close eye on the main active
volcanoes using meteorological observatories andweather stations that are located in close proximity to thevolcanoes. A mechanical seismograph was deployed at
Kagoshima weather station is 1888, and this marked the
beginning of constant onsite seismic observation near an
active volcano. The seismograph recorded the major eruption of Sakurajima in 1914. Japan set up its first volcano
observatory on Asamayama in 1911 in a team effort
between the Ministry of Education’s Imperial Earthquake
Investigation Committee and the Nagano Weather Station.
In the 1960s, the JMA made a serious effort to implement a constant volcano observation system nationwide,
and initially designated 17 active volcanoes for constantmonitoring using high-sensitivity seismographs deployedat meteorological observatories and weather stations on ornear the volcanoes. Other volcanoes not on this watch list
were checked periodically by mobile volcano observation
teams.

2. Japan Meteorological Agency Responsible for Monitoring Volcanoes

In Japan, the JMA, an affiliate agency of the Ministryof Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT),
is responsible for monitoring volcanic activity. Anotheraffiliate agency of the MLIT, the Japanese Coast Guard
monitors volcanoes on the seafloor and remote islands,
while the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI)
is in charge of monitoring crustal deformation using anationwide crustal deformation observation network. In
addition, the MLIT and prefectural erosion control departments monitor mudflows (lahars) as part of their erosion
control responsibilities. Finally, universities and research
institutes have their own volcanic observation networks

Local MeteorologicalObservatory(Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Officer)

Local Governments and Other
Organizations
Personnel
distached tosite when activity
status changes

Normal times:
Adopt/refine Volcanic Alert Levels throughjoint discussion of evacuation plan at regional
Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Council
Clearly describe status of volcanic activity
based on observation, monitoring, andassessment of the volcano
Emergencies:
Jointly discuss disaster mitigation
response and make recommendations

Rapid notification

Utilize videoconferencing
systemShare observation data, analysis results,
research findings, and material required
to assess volcanic activity

Volcanic Observation and Information Center(Sapporo, Sendai, Tokyo, Fukuoka)

Monitor volcano
with 24/7 system

Volcanic Warnings
and Forecasts

Assess volcanic
statusInterpret observation
data and make overall
assessment

Volcanic status updates
Tiltmeter

SeismographSend
observation datato center in real
time
Regular / ad hoc
onsite observation(Electromagnetic
observation,
geothermal
observation, etc.)
Infrasonicmicrophone

Volcanic Eruption
Prediction Liaison
CouncilGPS
monitoring

Produce volcanic
warnings

Assess volcanic
statusMobile volcano
observation teams

Upgrade ad hoc local
observation system
Even during normal times,
to to site and conduct surveys

Remote camera

Fig. 2 JMA’s volcano monitoring and warning advisories.

－ 102 －

Analyzeobservation data
Detailed analysisof seismic, crustal deformation,
infrasonic, remote observation,and other data

The Japan Meteorological Agency’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives — H. YAMASATO et al.

Beginning in 2002, a series of Volcano Observation andInformation Centers (VOICs) was erected in Sapporo,
Sendai, Tokyo, and Fukuoka to collect and monitor data
24 hours a day from equipment installed close to thevolcanoes (Yamasato, 2005). By 2009, the 47 active volcanoes identified by the CCPVE as requiring monitoringand observation were being monitored by VOICs using
borehole seismographs and tiltmeters in combination withexisting equipment (Fig. 2).
In addition to seismic observation, GPS, and crustal
deformation observation by tiltmeter, the VOICs provide
a 24-hour centralized surveillance including visual monitoring by high-sensitivity cameras and camera installedon the walls of craters and infrasonic observation. Morerecently, we have made good progress exploiting theobservational data of universities, research institutes,
erosion control departments, and other relevant organizations to dramatically upgrade the monitoring system. This
goes well beyond telemetry observation, for every VOIC
sends mobile observation teams out to the volcanoes on aregular basis to repeatedly check geothermal temperatures,volcanic gas, GPS, geomagnetic total intensity, in orderto enhance our understanding of volcanic activity. Mobile
observation teams are also sent out on an ad hoc basis toimprove our understanding when volcanoes act erraticallyor abnormally.
When volcanoes exhibit heightened or escalating unrest,
staff are dispatched to the site to monitor, observe, andconduct mobile tests and measurements. Sakurajima is
one of the most active volcanoes in Japan, and it is closely
monitored by the Kagoshima Local MeteorologicalObservatory in conjunction with the Fukuoka VOIC.
Resident Offices for Volcanic Disaster Mitigation havebeen set up at Asamayama, Izu-Oshima, Miyakejima, andAsosan. These offices pursue hazard mitigation work incollaboration with local governments, while also taking
charge of the mobile observation teams.
3. JMA Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Information

At the same time JMA was building a constant volcano
observation system during the 1960s, the agency begandisseminating volcanic information to the public in 1965,
and soon began providing disaster prevention information
with the goal of mitigating damage and destruction caused
by volcanoes.
The nature of volcanic information held by JMA haschanged somewhat over the years, but beginning in
December 2007 the agency began releasing volcanic warnings and forecasts in order to further mitigate volcanic
disasters.
Volcanic information had a clear legal position ofimportance for disaster prevention before 2007, and thebasic idea of releasing volcanic warning and forecasts led
to the creation of Volcanic Alert Levels.
Deep low-frequency earthquakes around Fujisan in2000 boosted momentum to produce volcanic hazard
maps for the area, set up a Fujisan Volcanic Hazard Map
Review Committee, and other countermeasures, and theidea of Volcanic Alert Levels took hold through a seriesof meetings that determined JMA volcanic information
could be used to trigger specific disaster prevention countermeasures at critical moments when the need arises.
This approach came into focus a bit later during study
sessions covering “disaster prevention countermeasurescorresponding to specific volcanic information” (Fujiyama
et al., 2013). Essentially, the scheme works as follows.
Before a volcanic anomaly occurs, relevant organizations
get together and share projections based on the volcano’s
past history of volcanic unrest (eruption scenario) andhazardous areas (volcanic hazard maps). They come toagreement on what criteria to use in deciding when to startevacuating people, when to prohibit people from hiking
or climbing in the area, and other disaster responses.
Note that these procedures are done during normal times
when the volcano is quiescent. Later, if the volcano shows
signs of unrests, the JMA issues a Volcanic Alert Levelreflecting the current state of volcanic activity based on its
24-hour volcano surveillance system.
The Volcanic Alert Levels are divided into five stages
depending on “areas that must be warned” and “responses
that should be taken” for the volcano’s current state ofunrest: Level 1 signifies that no particular response or
action is required; Levels 2-3 indicate that, while residential areas are not threatened, the volcano is off limits forhiking or climbing; Levels 4-5 reveal that residential areas
are starting to be threatened by the danger of eruptions(Table 1). Levels 2 and 3 are differentiated by the degree
to which hiking and climbing are prohibited in hazardous
areas, with the exact definitions decided in advancethrough consultation among local relevant organizations.
Level 4 is the stage where people with special needs areevacuated and other local residents prepare to evacuate,
and at Level 5, all local residents are subject to mandatory
evacuation from threatened areas. Each Volcanic Alert
Level is associated with specific keywords—“evacuation”,“prepare for evacuation”, “do not approach the volcano”,“do not approach the crater”, “normal” etc.—and thishelps ensure response compliance of local residents,
mountain climbers, sightseers, and so on.
Joint deliberations regarding of Volcanic Alert Levels
for volcanoes subject to constant monitoring continue
among local relevant organizations in the Volcanic－ 103 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Disaster Mitigation Councils (discussed below), and“areas that must be warned” and “responses that should betaken” commensurate with the Volcanic Alert Levels arebeing defined in the regional disaster prevention plans oflocal governments for volcanoes throughout Japan. The
Volcanic Alert Level scheme is gradually being implemented, and as of the end of 2012, has been put into effectfor 29 volcanoes (Fig. 1).
When the Volcanic Alert Level changes (that is, theresponse for an area that must be warned changes), a new
volcanic warning and volcanic forecast is issued that iscommensurate with the new level. So, for example, if thelevel is moved up to Levels 2-3, a near-crater warning isissued. If the level is moved up to Levels 4-5, a warning
is issued. At Level 1, a volcanic forecast is issued. If awarning is explicitly issued for an area, the local governments responsible for evacuating and preparing to evacuate people know exactly where these evacuation areasare.
Even if a volcano is not yet incorporated in the Volcanic
Alert Level system, near-crater warnings and warnings
will be issued, but since specific response measures havenot been formulated for volcanoes outside the system
and JMA warnings are tied to these response measures,
there is still work to be done. Specifically, evacuationplans must be drawn up through collaboration of relevantorganizations in the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils(discussed below), and these volcanic districts must be
successively brought into the Volcanic Alert Level system.
Volcanic warnings and forecasts are immediatelytransmitted to all relevant organizations and stakeholders
including affected prefectures, and conveyed to local
residents through municipalities, news media, and JMA’s
website. In addition, warnings for submarine volcanoes
are issued in the form of near sea area warnings.
4. Collaboration Through the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils

The Volcanic Alert Level framework is outlined in the
Basic Plan for Disaster Prevention (the Volcano Disaster
Countermeasure Volume) that was revised by the Central
Disaster Management Council on December 27, 2011 and
September 6, 2012. The scheme was further elaborated
through linkage to evacuation plans (who, how, where, andwhen) drawn up through collaboration among membersof Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils that are established in all prefectures with active volcano. The Volcanic
Disaster Mitigation Councils are made up of all interested bodies and stakeholders in the prefecture including
prefectural authorities, municipalities, meteorological

Table 1 Volcanic warnings / forecasts and Volcanic Alert Levels.

－ 104 －

The Japan Meteorological Agency’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives — H. YAMASATO et al.

observatories, erosion control departments, and volcanologists. Thus, the local evacuation plans (who is evacuatedwhen and from where) are closely integrated with theVolcanic Alert Level system (Fig. 3).
JMA has stationed Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Officers, the primary in charge of volcanic disaster mitigation efforts, at most of the meteorological observatories adjacent to the 47 active volcanoes under constantsurveillance that were mentioned earlier. During normal
times, the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Officers work to
encourage local relevant organizations and volcanologists
to organize and convene Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Councils to ensure the Volcanic Alert Level system interworks seamlessly with the local evacuation scheme if
an eruption actually occurs. The officer also reconciles
inconsistencies between the two schemes—areas that mustreceive volcanic warnings in the Volcanic Alert Level
scheme and areas that must receive evacuation orders
and designated off-limits in the evacuation plans—andreconcile any local problems with the Volcanic Alert Levelsystem through joint discussions regarding the evacuation
plan. Working together with local relevant organizations in
the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils in normal times
ensures that evacuation plans integrate smoothly with theVolcanic Alert Level system. The face-to-face contact
enables stakeholders to share different visions of how

disaster mitigation (share knowledge regarding specificdisaster mitigation responses tailored to Volcanic Alert
Levels), and is absolutely essential for cooperating withother organizations and mounting an effective evacuation
plan-based response.
One specific local government initiative based on
the revised Basic Plan for Disaster Prevention brought
together relevant organization centered mainly arounddisaster management departments from Yamanashi,
Shizuoka, and Kanagawa prefectures in establishing theVolcanic Disaster Mitigation Council of Fujisan on June
8, 2012. Local meteorological observatories and JMA
Headquarters also participate on the Fujisan Council as acore group. In setting up the council, participants agreed
to the following four conditions to ensure the Volcanic
Disaster Mitigation Council would continue to serve as an
substantive Evacuation Alliance System—promoting joint
discussion of evacuation plans during normal time, andsolid advice to evacuation sites during emergencies—inline with the Basic Plan for Disaster Prevention:(1) Clear legal position
To eliminate differences in commitment among
constituent organizations of Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Councils and to ensure adequate funding for organizations to participate in council meetings (mainly providing
travel expenses to attend meetings), it is important that

Establish Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils

When is high risk?

Joint discussions within core groups* of Volcanic
Disaster Mitigation Councils* Prefectural authorities, municipalities, meteorological observatory,
erosion control departments, volcanologists, etc.

Eruption scenario
Where is high risk?

When & where high risk?

Volcanic Alert Level

Hazard map

Evacuate whenand from where?

Evacuation plan
Evacuate how
and to where?

Establish "face-to-face relations" with local organizations
and "shared visions of disaster mitigation response"

Inform local residents

Joint discussions in Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils

Disaster mitigaton
map
Disaster mitigation
training

Fig. 3 Role of Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils based on the Basic Plan for Disaster Prevention.

－ 105 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

councils are established based on “local disaster management plans” as defined in Article 40 of the Disaster
Countermeasures Basic Act.
(2) Jurisdiction in advising target evacuation areas
To ensure proper evacuation orders based on professional consideration of volcanic risk, target evacuation
areas must be defined through collaboration of constituent
organizations who are members of the Volcanic Disaster
Mitigation Council, and advice is given to mayors of
towns and municipalities from the council. If local
authorities were to make these evacuation calls on theirown, there is a tendency for target evacuation areas toexpand as the safety coefficient gradually increases during
the process of conveying volcanic risk information to the
public (warnings → hazard maps → evacuation orders),
thus requiring more people to be evacuated than necessary (a phenomenon known in business administration
as the bullwhip effect). Moreover, repeatedly calling forevacuation diminishes people’s trust in disaster management information, which makes it harder to get people
to evacuate in the event of a real or imminent danger.
Indeed, a desultory response to volcanic warnings could
hinder smooth and rapid evacuation, and even increase thenumber of victims if warnings are not taken seriously (theso-called cry-wolf effect).
(3) Establish core group to conduct technical study ofevacuation timing and target evacuation area
In order for Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils toadvise mayors of evacuation timing and target evacuation areas, it is essential that the core groups most deeply
involved in establishing when and what areas should be

evacuated—prefectures, municipalities, meteorologicalobservatories, erosion control departments, professional
volcanologists, and so on—can work together flexibly
when required.
(4) Involvement of volcanologists
To ensure smooth technical consideration of evacuation timing and target evacuation areas, members of
the Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic
Eruptions and other professional volcanologists must serve
as regular members (i.e., not observer status) and participate in the joint discussions.
These four conditions are essential and should be carefully considered in all of Japan’s volcanic areas in orderfor the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils’ Evacuation
Alliance System based on the Basic Plan for Disaster
Prevention to work efficiently and smoothly.
5. Other Information Besides Volcanic Warning and
Forecasts

Besides volcanic warnings and forecasts, JMA has also
been issuing forecasts for the following types of volcanic
phenomena since March 2008.
First, Ash Fall Forecasts are issued for eruptions
exceeding a certain scale, and forecast areas likely to beaffected by ash fall up to about six hours after an eruption.
Assuming a plume model based on the scale of the eruption being observed, results are calculated based on JMA’s
Tracer Transport Model using numerical weather prediction data and released to the public. So far, these forecasts have been issued for three volcanoes: Sakurajima,

Table 2 Various kinds of volcano-related information other than warnings and forecasts.

－ 106 －

The Japan Meteorological Agency’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives — H. YAMASATO et al.

Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) and Asamayama. When
Asamayama erupted in 2009, the small amount of ashfall over western Tokyo was accurately predicted using
this approach. However, current Ash Fall Forecasts only
predict areas likely to experience ash fall. A more sophisticated forecast model is currently under consideration thatwould incorporate qualitative data based on the disaster
response that should be taken.
Second, Volcanic Gas Affected Area Outlooks are issued
when large volumes of volcanic gas are emitted that might
adversely affect residential areas over a long period oftime. Current forecasts clearly indicate an area subject torisk of high concentrations of volcanic gas in association
with high atmospheric winds forecast two times a day aslarge volumes of sulfur dioxide continue to be emitted
from Miyakejima.
In addition to warnings and forecasts, JMA also puts out
various other types of information listed in Table 2 either
periodically or as required.
The JMA’s Details of Volcanic Activity provide textbased information about the status of volcanic activity,
that, like volcanic warnings and forecasts, are available
through an online system. In addition to the regular
Bulletins on Volcanic Activity that come out monthly with
figures, charts, photos, and other detailed information,
special reports are issued for volcanoes not included on
the constant observation watch list when circumstances
dictate. Finally, Weekly Volcanic Activity Reports andMonthly Volcanic Activity Reports are also released weekly
and monthly, as indicated.
When an eruption occurs, Observation Reports on
Eruption are released as breaking news. Observation
Reports on Eruption deliver the minimum informationnecessary as quickly as possible—the time of eruption,
ash-plume height, and so on—so even in the case of
volcanoes such as Sakurajima that erupt quite frequency, areport is issued within minutes of each eruption.
As part of a worldwide network for monitoring anddisseminating information on atmospheric volcanic ash
clouds that may endanger aviation, the JMA also puts out
Airway Volcanic Ash Advisories, but we will save that foranother report (Shirato, 2013).
References－ 107 －

1) Shirato, S.（2013）: Volcanic Ash Advisories.
Technical Note of the National Research Institutefor Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380，
109-111．
2) Fujii, T.（ 2013）：The Japanese Coordinating
Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions
and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation．
Technical Note of the National Research Institutefor Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380,
113-120.
3) Fujiyama, H., Tokumoto, S., Kochi, K., and Shimbaru,
T. (2013): Volcano Disaster Prevention Work of
the Cabinet Office. Technical Note of the National
Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster
Prevention, No. 380, 95-99.
4) Yamasato, H. (2005): Modern History of Volcano
Observation in Japan: Especially Volcano Surveillanceof Japan Meteorological Agency. Bulletin of the
Volcanological Society of Japan, 50, S7-S18, (inJapanese with English abstract).
5) Yamasato, H. (2007): Japan’s Active Volcanoes.
Science, 77, 1256-1259, (in Japanese).

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcanic Ash Advisories
Shomei SHIRATO*

Volcanic ash adversely affects the aviation industry
by causing engine failure, abrasion of windshields
that reduces visibility, and ashfall on runways thatprevents takeoff and landing. To mitigate such effects,
the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO),
working together with the World MeteorologicalOrganization (WMO), recommended establishment ofVolcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACs) and designatednine centers covering the world (Fig. 1). The VAACs arein charge of issuing Volcanic Ash Advisories (VAAs) thatpredict the extent and movement of volcanic ash. Tasked
with monitoring movement of volcanic ash for East Asiaand the Northwest Pacific airspace, the Tokyo VAAC wasestablished at the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)
and commenced operations in 1997 (Sawada, 1997).
When the Tokyo VAAC receives information about
an eruption or ash plume from a volcano observatory or
pilot in its area of responsibility, or observes an ash cloudfrom a meteorological satellite (e.g., Fig. 2 shows satellite
images recorded when Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake)
erupted in 2011), the center issues a VAA to meteorological watch offices that provide meteorological information
throughout their own Flight Information Regions (FIRs),
aviation weather stations, aviation authorities, and other
VAACs throughout the world (Fig. 3).
The VAAs are written in a special abbreviated format
and include information about the erupting volcano(name, summit elevation, location), time of eruption,
horizontal and vertical extent of the ash cloud at the timeof observation, as well as its movement, and forecast ash
distributions in six-hour intervals for the next 18 hours.
Also included is a graphic, so one can easily visualize thecontent of the VAA (Fig. 4). When a volcano erupts inJapan, the Tokyo VAAC also provides Japan’s civil aviation authorities and other aviation related organizations
with its own information consisting of ash distribution

Fig. 1 The nine Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACs) around the world and their areas of responsibility.
(●: VAAC ▲: Active volcanoes The red boundary indicates the Tokyo VAAC's area of responsibility.)* Japan Meteorological Agency Volcanological Division－ 109 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

maps in hourly intervals for up to six hours. For especially active volcanoes in Japan, assuming they erupt on acertain scale, ash distribution maps in hourly intervals up
to six hours ahead are issued at 3:00 AM (JST), 9:00 AM,
3:00 PM, and 9:00 PM.
When the Tokyo VAAC began operations in 1997, fulltime staff at the Haneda Aviation Weather Service Center
carried out the center’s services during the day when air
traffic was busy. During the night when there was little
air traffic, staff at the Seismological and Volcanological
Department, JMA at Otemachi in Tokyo conducted VAAC
operations along with their own tasks. Volcanic activity inTokyo VAAC’s area of responsibility was relatively calmin the early years, so few VAAs were issued and there
were no major organizational problems. But more recently,
Sakurajima and several volcanoes on Kamchatka peninsula have become active and this has caused the number
of VAAs to soar. Since 2009, more than 1,000 VAAs
have been issued annually, which is roughly ten times thenumber issued when the Tokyo VAAC was first established. In order to handle the increased work load, separate
operations were consolidated at the JMA Seismologicaland Volcanological Department in March 2006, and fulltime staff were added in June 2011 to monitor ash clouds

and issue VAAs 24 hours a day.
In April 2010, airspace all across northern Europe wasaffected—planes were grounded and enormous financial
losses incurred—by volcanic ash contamination in theupper atmosphere for well over a week from the eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull. In responseto this, the European Organization for the Safety of Air
Navigation, EUROCONTROL, rushed through an air
traffic control scheme based on calculated concentrationof volcanic ash. To underpin such efforts, the ICAO iscurrently investigating the extent to which aircraft engines
can tolerate concentrations of volcanic ash and drafting
new standards for safe navigation. One challenge is thatit’s not easy to accurately determine the concentrationof volcanic ash using current meteorological satellite
technology, so we are considering adding information
to VAAs: specifically, whether the ash cloud is clearly
discernible in satellite images and a confidence level.
Reference

1) Sawada, Y. (1997): Launch of volcanic ash on flightroute operations. Journal of the MeteorologicalSociety of Japan, 41, 14934-14939．

Fig. 2 Infrared differential image of volcanic ash plume over Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) observedby meteorological satellite (Himawari 7) at 5:00 AM January 27, 2011.

－ 110 －

Volcanic Ash Advisories — S. SHIRATO

Fig. 3 Information Flow of Volcanic Ash Advisory.

Fig. 4 Volcanic Ash advisory information in Graphical format model (VAG).

－ 111 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions
and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Toshitsugu FUJII*

1. Introduction

The Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic
Eruptions (CCPVE) was established in 1974 when the
National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption wasformulated. It is a private advisory organ of the Director
General of the Meteorological Agency and has ambiguous
responsibility and authority; nevertheless, it has beenplaying a major role in predicting volcanic eruptions inJapan. To discuss the contributions of the Committee tothe mitigation of volcanic disasters we need to look backon the history of the National Plan for the Prediction ofVolcanic Eruption.
2. Actions taken to formulate the Volcanic Eruption Prediction Plan

The history of studies of the observation of volcanic
activities in Japan can be traced back to 1911, when
Fusakichi Omori monitored earthquakes in a volcano
observatory established on Asamayama by the Imperial
Earthquake Investigation Committee and Nagano
Weather Station. Systematic studies on volcanoes byuniversity researchers started in 1928, when Kenzo Sassaof the Faculty of Science at Kyoto Imperial University
investigated the relationship between volcanic tremor anderuption at an Aso Volcanological Laboratory affiliatedwith the Faculty.
In 1933, Takeshi Minakami started geophysicalobservations at Yunodaira Observatory, which was thepredecessor of the Asamayama Volcano Observatoryof the Earthquake Research Institute of the Universityof Tokyo. His studies of the relationship between
earthquakes and eruption led the world’s volcanic
observation research. Showashinzan of Usuzan erupted
from 1943 to 1945. During the eruption, Minakami et al.
of the Earthquake Research Institute of the Universityof Tokyo, by monitoring earthquakes and conducting
leveling at the slope of the mountain, observed the processof the formation of a new volcano caused by dacite
magma intrusion. The studies formed the foundations of
volcanic activity observational studies in Japan, whichwere developed on the basis of physical monitoring byuniversity researchers. These studies were quite different
from observational studies in other countries, such as
those by the US Geological Survey, which is part of
the Department of the Interior, or by national volcanic
observatories in Italy at, for example the Vesuvius
Observatory, which involve physical and chemical
observations and geological surveys.
Volcano observation requires physical observations ofvarious kinds over a long period of time, and universities
have established observatories for volcano studies. Before
the formulation of the National Plan for the Prediction ofVolcanic Eruption, the University of Tokyo establishedthe Izu-Oshima Geo-electromagnetic Observatory (1959)
and Kirishimayama Volcano Observatory (1964); theDisaster Prevention Research Institute of Kyoto University
constructed Sakurajima Volcano Observatory (1960); andthe Faculty of Science of Kyushu University established
Shima bara Institute of Volcanology and Balmeology(1962), which was reorganized into Shimabara Volcano
Observatory in 1971.
In 1963, a Priority Research Areas system wasestablished for Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research,and “disaster science” was included in four of the priority
areas. In 1965, the Volcanic Eruption Prediction Team wasestablished as an organization for the study of disasterscience. The group consisted of 6 research groups from
5 universities and conducted intense observations ofearthquake activity on Fujisan. This joint observation
led to the nationwide organization of studies to predict
eruptions. Observation studies progressed mainly atuniversity observatories at Asamayama, Sakurajima,and Asosan, where volcanoes had been active, enabling
eruptions to be predicted with relatively high accuracy.
Activity at Minamidake on Sakurajima, which had
been active since 1955, intensified still further after an
explosive eruption on 2 October 1972, leading researchers
to suggest that the eruptions could become large-scale andlateral, as had occurred in the Taisho and Showa eruptions.

* Research Institute for Disaster Mitigation and Environmental Studies, Crisis & Environmental Management Policy Institute－ 113 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

3. Start of the National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption

Against this background, Takeshi Nagata, the thenpresident of the Geodesy Council of the Ministry of
Education, proposed that earthquake prediction researchers
assimilate research into volcanic eruption prediction so as
to promote such prediction. This was because the Second
National Plan for Earthquake Prediction had finished infiscal year 1973, and the next plan was scheduled to start.
However, the consent of the earthquake prediction study
group could not be obtained, and it was decided that the
new plan would start independently of any Earthquake
Prediction Plan. In June 1973, a proposal entitled“Promotion of Volcanic Eruption Prediction Studies” wasformulated by the Geodesy Council and put forward to therelevant ministers. In the face of active volcanic activity
at Sakurajima, the Act on Special Measures for Active
Volcanoes was enacted on 24 July of the same year.
The preceding First National Plan for Earthquake
Prediction was centered on “studies” of earthquake
prediction, but the word “study” was omitted from theSecond Plan in response to social demand for practicalearthquake prediction. In response to this, the succeeding“National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption”
ruled out the word “study” from its title.
On the basis of the proposal of the Geodesy Council,
the Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption was
implemented in 1974 as a national project. The First
Plan aimed to construct monitoring systems appropriate
to the characteristics of each volcano and collect thenecessary monitoring data for volcano studies anderuption prediction. Therefore, the mainstays included
increasing and strengthening volcano monitoring systems,
constructing observatories, organizing mobile observation
teams, promoting research to develop prediction methods,
establishing a coordinating committee, and developing
human resources.
On the basis of the plan, the CCPVE was established
as a private advisory organ of the Director General of
the Meteorological Agency, with its head office in the
Meteorological Agency. Members of the Committee
included not only university professors and other people oflearning and experience but also executive officers of the
Ministry of Education, National Land Agency, Science andTechnology Agency, and other relevant authorities. Thissituation was quite different from that of the preceding
Coordination Committee for Earthquake Prediction,
because administrative power was judged necessary toensure fast mobilization and judgments during volcanic
eruptions. Since it was first established, the main objectiveof the Committee has been disaster prevention. Takeshi

Nagata, the then president of the Geodesy Council,
became the first president of the Committee.
4. The National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption and Volcano Observatories

In 1974, when the First Plan started, volcanoes on Izu-Oshima and Sakurajima had become active and wereintensively observed by mobile observation teams fromuniversities. Initially, construction of observatories was
not included in the Plan, but the Geodesy Council revised
the First Plan soon after its formulation and decided
to include construction of a new university-owned
observatory on Usuzan in the proposal. This was because
there was no university-owned volcano observatory in
Hokkaido (although there are many active volcanoes in
the prefecture) and Usuzan was thought to erupt soon: it
had erupted at intervals of about 30 years and more than
30 years had passed since its eruption in 1943. At thattime, on Usuzan there was only one set of seismometers,
which belonged to the Meteorological Agency. The factthat Toyako Onsen resort was located near the volcanic
crater aroused social interest and propelled the revision. It
was also decided that an annual and systematic practice ofintensive and comprehensive volcano observation would
be included in the revised plan. The Geodesy Council
produced a summary document called “Partial Revision of
the National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption”
and sent the proposal and request to the relevant ministries
and agencies.
In 1977, the construction of an observatory by
Hokkaido University on Usuzan was approved, but
before the observatory started operating a large numberof earthquakes that could be felt, and had hypocentersnear Usuzan, occurred on 6 August. At 7:50 on 7 August,the Meteorological Agency dispatched Special NoticeNo. 6 on volcanic activity to warn people of the eruption.
Immediately after the announcement, at 9:21, the volcano
issued ash plume from the southeastern slope of Kousu on
the top of Usuzan; the ash plume reached an elevation of
1,200 m.
Backed by the start of the National Plan for thePrediction of Volcanic Eruption, the Meteorological
Agency renewed and modernized observation devices andsystems at those of the 16 observatories considered mostimportant. In 1977, it constructed a constant observation
station on Kusatsu-Shiranesan as its 17th observatory.
The Second Plan, which started in 1979, aimed
to strengthen observational studies toward practicalimplementation and took a step forward from theFirst Plan’s central objective of observation systemconstruction. To achieve the Plan’s goals, the volcanoes－ 114 －

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation — T. FUJII

to be monitored were classified into 1) particularly
active ones (Usuzan, Asamayama, Izu-Oshima, Asosan,
Kirishimayama, and Sakurajima) and 2) others. Besides
upgrading of the observation system, the priority items
chosen were construction of systems for predicting
eruption, basic studies for understanding volcanic
phenomena, and development of methods for predicting
eruption. There were university observatories on active
volcanoes (i.e. those in the first category). The numbersof earthquake observation stations were increasedaround these observatories so as to cover large areas,
and telemetric systems for intensive recording of various
data were introduced. Hokkaido University’s volcano
observatory on Usuzan was chosen to monitor also
Tarumaesan, Tokachidake, and Hokkaido-Komagatake,and observation stations were constructed in these areas.
Since the initiation of the Second Plan, the Ministry ofInternational Trade and Industry’s Geological Survey ofJapan has participated in the Plan and joined CCPVE towork together with the universities, the Meteorological
Agency, the Geographical Survey Institute (now the
Geospatial Information Authority of Japan), the National
Research Center for Disaster Prevention (now the
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster
Prevention), and the Hydrographic Department of the
Marine Safety Agency to prepare annual volcanic geology
maps, which are needed for understanding the history of
volcanic activity.
Two volcanoes erupted as if in anticipation of the startof the Second Plan. One was Asosan, which erupted
from June 1979 over a period of 6 months. Because thestudy team at the Aso Volcanological Laboratory, Facultyof Science, Kyoto University, predicted activation of
the volcano and a resultant increase in the frequencyof volcanic earthquakes and tremors, the local weather
bureau dispatched frequent volcanic activity notices, andmunicipal governments ordered evacuation of the area 1
km from the crater. However, the Crater East Side Ropeway
Station was left out of the order even though it was locatedno farther than 1 km from the crater, and some tourists atthe station were killed or injured. The other volcano was
Ontakesan, which unexpectedly erupted at its summit
on 28 October 1979. At the time, it was believed that
Ontakesan had erupted for the first time since the dawn ofhistory. The volcano was located in the area to be coveredby Nagoya University, which was not yet participating in
the Plan, and had therefore not been observed. With therevision in circumstances, Nagoya University joined thePlan and started monitoring Ontakesan, but this did notoccur until the time of the Fourth Plan.
During the period of the Second Plan, the Faculty of

Science and Technology of Hirosaki University asked
the Ministry of Education for permission and funds toconstruct a new observatory on Iwakisan to monitor its
volcanic activity, and construction was approved in 1981.
The Faculty of Science of Tokyo Institute of Technology
started geochemical observations of Kusatsu-Shiranesan
which at the time was becoming active.
In the Third Plan, which aimed to strengthen
and enhance the observational studies based on thecharacteristics of volcanoes and promote basic studies ofthe eruption mechanisms of volcanoes, Japanese active
volcanoes were classified into 1) 12 particularly active
ones that needed to be intensively observed (Tokachidake,
Tarumaesan, Usuzan, Hokkaido-Komagatake, KusatsuShiranesan, Asamayama, Izu-Oshima, Miyakejima,
Asosan, Unzendake, Kirishimayama , and Sakurajima);
2) active volcanoes and those with the potential toerupt (Fujisan and 22 other volcanoes and submarine
volcanoes); and 3) others.
Construction of a system for promoting comprehensive
observation of Izu Oshima was advised. On the basis of
this advice, in 1985 the Earthquake Research Instituteof the University of Tokyo integrated its geomagnetic
observatory and tsunami observatory on Izu-Oshima
into Izu-Oshima Volcano Observatory. To strengthen
observations of Unzendake, which had been newly selected
for intensive monitoring, in 1984 the existing Shimabara
Volcano Observatory of the Faculty of Sciences, Kyushu
University, was enlarged and reorganized into Shimabara
Earthquake and Volcano Observatory, with an increase instaff and upgrading of the facility.
With the aim of strengthening observations of thosevolcanoes scattered in the Tohoku Area that had thepotential to erupt, such as Iwatesan, Azumayama,
Chokaisan, and Akita-Yakeyama, in 1987 a division in
charge of volcano studies was added to the Observation
Center for Earthquake Prediction of the Faculty of Science,
Tohoku University, and the facility was reorganized into
the Observation Center for Prediction of Earthquakes andVolcanic Eruptions.
In July 1989, during the Fourth Plan, a submarine
volcano erupted off the coast of the city of Ito andthe Teishi submarine knoll was formed. Against thisbackground, the Izu-Tobu Volcanic Group was added to
the group of particularly active volcanoes to be intensively
monitored (Group 1), increasing the number of suchvolcanoes from 12 to 13. Introduction of basic studies,such as high-pressure experiments, alongside observation
studies was also stressed. In response to this, a division of
volcanic studies was added to the earthquake prediction
observation facility of Nagoya University, which joined－ 115 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

the National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption.
The facility was reorganized into the Research Center
for Seismology and Volcanology. The Nansei-Toko
Observatory for Earthquakes and Volcanoes of the Facultyof Science, Kagoshima University, also joined the Plan.
In 1990 earthquakes were observed near Tachibana Bay,and in July of the same year earthquakes started to occur
directly beneath Fugendake (Unzendake). The mobile
observation team of the Meteorological Agency started
mobile observations, and the Shimabara Earthquake andVolcano Observatory attached to Kyushu University
established several temporary observation stations. On 17
November, immediately after a mobile observation teamof the universities had established temporary observation
stations, phreatic explosions occurred from two of
Fugendake’s craters. In April 1991, magmatophreatic
explosions became active, and in early May notable
expansion of the volcano was observed, suggestingmagma intrusion. On 20 May, the top of a lava dome
appeared in the Jigokuato Crater, and the dome continued
growing following the intrusion of magma. On 25 May,
the lava dome collapsed, and the first pyroclastic flow
was confirmed to have flowed down the Mizunashigawa
River. Many pyroclastic flows followed, reaching farther
and farther. On 3 June, 43 persons were killed, including
firemen and journalists; the latter were taking videos of
pyroclastic flows within the controlled area.
During the 6-year eruption period, Kyushu University’s
Shimabara Earthquake and Volcano Observatory served
as the base for volcano researchers from all over thenation and provided space for liaison officers from the
Self-Defense Forces, police, and other people engaged
in disaster prevention. It also played a central role indisaster prevention in the region. The CCPVE dispatched
its deputy president to be stationed at the site for a monthin June 1991 to control the observation systems of thevarious organizations and establish a network amongthem.
In the Fourth Plan the active volcanoes were reclassified into 1) 13 particularly active volcanoes thatneeded to be intensively observed; 2) active volcanoes andthose with the potential for erupting (Fujisan and 22 othervolcanoes and submarine volcanoes); and 3) others. In theFifth and subsequent Plans the classifications were notrevised.
At the end of March 2000, during the period of the
Sixth Plan, Usuzan erupted for the second time after thestart of the Plan; this put the Plan to the test for its ability
to predict eruptions. After observing the occurrence of anearthquake swarm, the research team of the Usu Volcano
Observatory suggested to evacuate 16,000 people. People

were evacuated following the suggestion, and no one waskilled or injured by the eruption. During the eruption, thecentral members of the research committee for volcanic
eruption prediction, which was composed of university
researchers and in charge of planning and conducting
explorations of the volcano’s structure, stayed by turn in
Hokkaido University’s volcano observatory on Usuzan.
They maintained observation points, collected observation
data, and coordinated and selected the workshifts ofpersonnel, working with the observatory staff.
In June, Miyakejima, which had erupted in 1983,
erupted for the second time since the start of the Plan.
Initially, the movement of the magma was estimatedfrom the results of tilt and earthquake observations. The
submarine eruption on 27 June was correctly predicted,
and this was praised as a successful result of the National
Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption. However, inJuly the difficulty in predicting eruptions was manifested
by of the fail to predict the change of the mode of eruption
when the explosive eruptions from the summit crater
started following the subsidence of the summit. On 29
August, a low-temperature and slow pyroclastic flow
occurred, requiring the entire island to be evacuated.
Because of subsequent emissions of sulfur dioxide gas, theisland had to remain unpopulated over a period of 4 and ahalf years.
During this period, there were no passenger ships or
any other ordinary means of transport to the island. It wastherefore difficult for university staff to independently
monitor the volcano, and the observation team had to rely
on transfers provided by the Meteorological Agency. Afterthe island was evacuated, the commercial power supply
was shut down. Not only the university but also national
research institutes such as the Geographical Survey
Institute and National Research Institute for Earth Scienceand Disaster Prevention faced temporary data gaps.
From 1992 to 2000, nine former imperial and othernational universities were restructured so as to prioritize
their graduate schools. The research centers constructed
throughout Japan under the National Plan for thePrediction of Volcanic Eruption belonged to undergraduate
schools and not the newly intensified graduate schools.
Therefore, in and after the Sixth Plan, the observation
centers shifted their affiliations to graduate schools, withthe exception of the Earthquake Research Institute of the
University of Tokyo and the Disaster Prevention ResearchInstitute of Kyoto University, both of which stayed as theywere.
In 2004, when the Seventh Plan started, Asamayama
began magmatic explosions after a lapse of 21 years.
Observation was made mainly by the Earthquake－ 116 －

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation — T. FUJII

Research Institute of the University of Tokyo, which has
an observatory on Asamayama. The explosion was ona relatively small scale and caused almost no damage
to residential districts. Damage to farm products was
also relatively small because the eruption occurred from
September to November.
5. Incorporation of National Universities and Volcano
Observation

When the Seventh Plan started in 2004, national
universities were incorporated under the Act of General
Rules for Incorporated Administrative Agencies. The
incorporations ushered in a period in which volcano
observation by universities has been difficult. It was
decided that Management Expenses Grants would be
paid to each university in sums determined on the basisof the expenses paid in the previous fiscal year (2003),
thus impeding universities from requesting funds forconstructing or renovating volcano observatories andobservation points. It has therefore become difficult
to renovate observation points, even when they havedeteriorated.
The former Geodesy Council was disbanded because
of integration of the Ministry of Education and theScience and Technology Agency; the Council became
the Subdivision of Geodesy and Geophysics, Council for
Science and Technology. In December 2002, the volcano
section of the Subdivision summarized a proposal called“Temporary Strategy for Volcanic Observations andResearch by universities, etc”. It proposed to choose 16
most active volcanoes out of 34 that had been studied
by universities, enhance the observation network
infrastructure for those 16 volcanoes via research institutes
such as the National Research Institute for Earth Scienceand Disaster Prevention, share observation data among
universities and institutes, and use the data for predicting
eruptions.
Although the National Research Institute for Earth
Science and Disaster Prevention started to improveand reinforce volcano observation points on the basisof the proposal, budgeting has not been enough, andthe initial construction plan has not been completed.
However, two observation points on Kirishimayama that
had been installed on the basis of the proposal, together
with an observation point newly constructed under the
Meteorological Agency’s upgrading project associatedwith 47 volcanoes, were quite useful to monitor a seriesof eruptions that started as a sub-Plinian eruption on 26
January 2011. These stations played a very important rolein helping us to understand the nature of the eruptions.
Observational data from the National Research Institutefor Earth Science and the Disaster Prevention andMeteorological Agency have been available to the public
via the web site of the National Research Institute for
Earth Science and Disaster Prevention since 2012.
6. Integration with the Earthquake Prediction Plan

The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake occurred
during the Seventh National Plan for the Prediction ofEarthquake. Therefore, the eighth plan was not drawn up,
but a new Observation and Research Plan for Earthquake
Prediction was formulated in 1999. The new plan was
succeeded thereafter by the “Second Observation andResearch Plan for Earthquake Prediction.” On the basis ofreviews and outside evaluations of the Second Observation
and Research Plan for Earthquake Prediction and theSeventh National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic
Eruption, both Plans were integrated into the “Program of
Research and Observation for Earthquake and Volcanic
Eruption Prediction” in fiscal year 2009.
In the second year of the integrated plan, a magmatic
eruption occurred in Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) aftera lapse of about 300 years. On 26 and 27 January, 2011 a
sub-Plinian eruption occurred, spewing out pumice. After
subsequent inflow and accumulation of magma in thesummit crater, intermittent Vulcanian eruptions occurred.
These eruptions, which resulted in over 50 million tonnesof ejecta and lava, were among the largest in recent years,
but no explosive eruptions have been observed since 7
September 2011. The observation team could not detectsigns of the sub-Plinian eruption but successfully detected
premonitory phenomena of the Vulcanian eruptions, suchas slope changes and increased tremors, and predicted
the eruptions after February 2011. The borehole-typemonitoring system of the Meteorological Agency, built in
2010, played an important role in the predictions.
The Volcano Observatory at the Earthquake ResearchInstitute of the University of Tokyo on Kirishimayama had
been left unmanned as a result of the government policy of
reducing staff numbers to cut costs. Therefore, data weremonitored and transmitted to the Research Institute, but
the team could not communicate with local governmentand could not give sufficient advice on disaster prevention.
The Great East Japan Earthquake occurred on 11 March
2011. The National Program of Research and Observation
for Earthquake and Volcanic Eruption Prediction is being
partly revised; the revision was completed by the end of
2012. The progress of the present plan, which will end in
fiscal year 2013, is to be reviewed in 2012 by an outside
third party. On the basis of this outside evaluation the nextplan will be drawn up, but its development is difficult topredict because the Council for Science and Technology, in－ 117 －

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation — T. FUJII

its Interim Report on the Science and Technology Policy,
proposed that earthquake research systems be revised.
Because the Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption
has been integrated with that of earthquake prediction, theNational Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption will
surely be changed.
7. Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic
Eruptions
7.1 Roles of Coordinating Committee for Prediction ofVolcanic Eruptions

As described above, the CCPVE was organized on
the basis of the First National Plan for the Predictionof Volcanic Eruption, which started in 1974. The
Committee is made up of university scholars, experts fromresearch institutes, and representatives of administrative
organizations such as the Ministry of Education, Culture,
Sports, Science and Technology and the Cabinet Officein charge of disaster prevention, which are also membersof the Volcanic Eruption Prediction Plan. The term ofservice is 2 years, and the members are commissioned by
the Director General of the Meteorological Agency. The
members are to:(1) exchange information on the results of studies andwork by related institutes and organizations; promoteresearch on volcanic eruption prediction; and develop
technologies at each institute;(2) during volcanic eruptions, make comprehensive
judgments on the phenomena of eruption and improve
the quality of information about the volcano, thus
contributing to disaster prevention activities; and(3) comprehensively investigate measures for enhancing
systems for studying volcanic eruption prediction andmonitoring.
There are three regular meetings in an ordinary year,
but the Committee may be urgently summoned during
eruptions. Upon predicting a volcanic eruption, CCPVE
used to announce collective opinions or the comments
made by the Chair, but today its announcements mainly
include the results of investigations of a specific volcano
and evaluations of the activities of other volcanoes inJapan. The literature references investigated by CCPVE,and the Committee’s proceedings, are published in
CCPVE bulletins three times a year. Recently, most of thereferences have been published almost in real time on the
web pages of the Meteorological Agency.
An executive board has been established to discuss
the operations of the Committee. There have also been
Subcommittees for predicting the activity of specificvolcanoes and in specific regions. Working groups havebeen established to investigate specific topics, such asactivity levels and approval of new active volcanoes,
but today they serve as investigative commissions. The
Usuzan Subcommittee was established during the eruptionof Usuzan in 2000, and the Izu Subcommittee was formed
during the eruption of Miyakejima. The latter is the only
remaining Subcommittee as of 2012.
To s u p p o r t i n f o r m a t i o n t r a n s m i s s i o n b y t h e
Meteorological Agency, CCPVE working groups haveinvestigated approvals of the classification of volcanoes
as active and information about volcanic activity. In 1975,
CCPVE published “Nihon Kakkazan Soran” (Complete
Guide to Active Volcanoes in Japan) as its first project,which included 77 volcanoes. In 1991, the definition ofactive volcanoes was revised from “volcanoes with ahistorical record(s) of eruption” to “volcanoes that have
erupted in the past 2000 years,” thus increasing the number of active volcanoes from 77 to 83. In 1996, three volcanoes were newly listed as those with eruption records inthe past 2000 years, making the total number 86. In 2003,
the definition was revised again into an internationallyaccepted one of “volcanoes that have erupted in the last
~10,000 years or those in which fumaroles are active.”
Using the new definition, the volcanoes in Japan were revised; 108 were acknowledged to be active.
The Assessment and Investigative Commission on
Volcanic Activity, which was subsequently established,investigated the long-term activity of volcanoes inJapan and listed 47 volcanoes as those to be intensively
monitored for the time being. On the basis of the results,
the Meteorological Agency increased the number of
volcanoes to be monitored on a 24-h basis from 34 to
47 in 2010, and it constructed and improved observation
points. The Commission is also in charge of investigating
the basic data for approval of volcanoes as active. In 2011,
CCPVE approved more volcanoes as active on the basisof the results of the Commission, and the number of active
volcanoes in Japan was increased from 108 to 110.
The Investigative Commission on volcano observation
systems is investigating monitoring systems and isexchanging and integrating observational data from theMeteorological Agency and other related organizations.
The results of the Commission were used to increase thenumber of observation points when the Meteorological
Agency increased the number of volcanoes to be monitoredaround the clock. The Investigative Commission on fumeresearch in volcanic areas has been preparing a databaseon gases.
7.2 Contingency Plans

In contingencies, the executive board or expanded board
may judge an eruption, and sectional meetings and special－ 118 －

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation — T. FUJIICCPVE meetings are to be held when necessary to assess
the activity of the volcano. When the eruption is predicted
to last for a long time, a comprehensive observationteam is to be formed under CCPVE to estimate changes
in volcanic activity, establish new observation points,
and conduct mobile observations. Because the team mayneed to enter control areas and other dangerous zones asoccasion demands, the Meteorological Agency is to serveas the head office and engage in negotiations with local
governments, etc.
The comprehensive observation team is to consist
mainly of people from member organizations of the
National Plan for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption but
may also include researchers from other institutes whennecessary. Approval by the team leader, who is also amember of CCPVE, needs to be obtained for a person to
become a member of the team. However, the member’s
expenses will not be paid by CCPVE but will need to becovered by the institute to which he or she belongs, and theinstitute that dispatches the person will also be responsible
in the case of accidents, etc. Luckily, no accidents haveoccurred since the establishment of the National Plan for
the Prediction of Volcanic Eruption, mainly because only
small-scale eruptions have occurred. However, such acalm period cannot last forever, and urgent improvement
measures are needed.
7.3 Problem of the Term, “Eruption Scenarios”

Since 2007, the Meteorological Agency has been in
charge of issuing eruption predictions and warnings forJapan’s active volcanoes. At the same time, the Agency
has introduced and deployed an eruption alert levelsystem for volcanoes, starting with those that are readyfor introduction of the system. To introduce the alert levelsystem for a volcano, a time-sequence diagram of the
expected eruption called an eruption scenario should be
prepared to help establish judgment standards for deciding
on alert levels and clarify when changes in level should be
made. Because there are no established methods available
today for predicting the scale and modes of eruption, thescenario must be prepared on the basis of a particular
recorded past eruption event, assuming that the eruption
will progress as in the past, but this can never be taken
as the exact future scenario. More than one scenario may
be prepared, but not all cases can be assumed. Thus, in amanner of speaking, the scenarios are just for emergency
drills.
The Izu Subcommittee of CCPVE prepared an event
tree showing the divergences at which decisions weremade during an eruption of Izu-Oshima. It was called “theeruption scenario for Izu-Oshima”. The Volcano Group of“the Program of Research and Observation for Earthquake

and Volcanic Eruption Prediction”, organized thephenomena involved in the eruption, which occur in time
sequence, into an event tree and is developing methods todetermine the probability of each divergence. However, it
must be noted that the probabilities that are expressed asdivergences are only the frequencies observed in the pastand may differ from the actual probabilities in the future.
Probability prediction of low-frequency events, such as
volcanic eruptions, has not been statistically established,so care should be taken not to rely on unreliable numbers.
Another problem is that the event trees are also called“eruption scenarios.” Giving two different concepts(i.e. that of JMA and those of the Izu Subcommittee
and the Volcano Group of the Program of Researchand Observation for Earthquake and Volcanic Eruption
Prediction) the same name may cause confusion in real
scenarios of disaster prevention; this issue needs to beresolved urgently.
8. Conclusions

Unlike earthquake prediction, for which there isa government authority called the Headquarters for
Earthquake Research Promotion, there is no government
body for predicting volcanic eruption. The CCPVE isthe sole organization that evaluates volcanic activity andpredicts activity progress on the basis of monitored data.
The comprehensive observation team is responsible formonitoring and collecting data, which are indispensablefor predicting the progress of volcanic activity during
eruptions. Although team members may have to expose
themselves to danger, their legal security is not coveredby CCPVE but must be covered by the institutes towhich they belong. This is because the CCPVE is a
private advisory organ of the Director General of the
Meteorological Agency, which has no legal responsibility
or authority over the CCPVE, although it serves as a head
office.
In Japan, where volcanic activity could be intensified in
the near future, radical strengthening of disaster prevention
organizations is essential. Particularly, CCPVE—theorganization for assessing volcanic activity—should be
an official organization of the government instead ofbeing a private advisory organ of the Director General.
A centralized authority such as a Volcano Agency should
be ideally created to monitor, assess, and study volcanic
activity, but this may be difficult to actualize given the
recent trends in administrative reform.
Therefore, headquarters in charge of volcanic eruption
research promotion, such as Headquarters for Earthquake
Research Promotion, should be immediately established.
Under such headquarters, the national government should－ 119 －

The Japanese Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and its Contribution to Volcanic Disaster Mitigation — T. FUJII

be responsible for unifying related ministries and agencies
and preventing volcanic disasters.
References

1) Meteorological Agency (1996): Complete Guide to
Active Volcanoes in Japan (in Japanese), 2nd Edition,
500 pp.

－ 120 －

2) Geodesy Council (1997): Review Report on
Implementation of the Plan of Volcanic Eruption
Prediction (Report).
3) Investigatory Committee on “From Geodesy to Earth
System Science” (1999): From Geodesy to Earth
System Science – 100 years of the Geodesy Council(in Japanese), 520 pp.

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Actions for Volcanic Disaster Management
Shinji YAMAGUCHI*

1. Introduction

There are currently 110 active volcanoes in Japan.
Disasters induced by volcanic eruptions are frequentand have recently included the eruption of Unzendakein 1991 and the eruption of Usuzan and Miyakejima in
2000. Such disasters are caused by various events, suchas volcanic cinder falls, ash falls, pyroclastic flows,lava flows, volcanic mudflows, debris flows, and debris
avalanches. They have a tremendous impact on people’s
lives if the scale is large. In particular, large-scale volcanic
mudflows or debris flows, which are generally triggeredby rainfall on deposited volcanic ash, affect wide areas
for a long time. The Sabo departments (sediment-control
departments) of the central and prefectural governments
conduct volcanic sediment and erosion control projects
to prevent or mitigate the damage from sediment-related
disasters associated with volcanic eruptions.
2. Volcanic Sediment and Erosion Control Project andVolcanic Sediment and Erosion Control Plan

A Volcanic Sediment and Erosion Control Project(hereinafter “Volcano Sabo Project”) should be
conducted as a comprehensive measure that combines
the development or improvement of sediment-control
facilities and the establishment of warning and evacuation
systems. A Volcanic Sediment and Erosion Control Plan
(hereinafter “Volcano Sabo Plan”) should be formulated
to rationally and effectively implement a Volcano
Sabo Project. A Volcano Sabo Plan is composed of two
programs: a volcano sabo program for rainfall, which
addresses sediment movement phenomena attributableto rainfall over fragile geology in a volcanic region, anda volcano sabo program for eruption, which addresses
sediment movement phenomena attributable to volcanic
eruptions.
The Sabo departments of the central and prefectural
governments implement rational and effective structural
measures based on comprehensive reviews of the local
topographic conditions, regional plans, landscape, andenvironment according to the corresponding Volcano
Sabo Plans. They also implement nonstructural measures,

including installing sensors to monitor abnormal sedimentflows, and send the information to the relevant organizations to help establish warning and evacuation systems forthe public.
To take appropriate measures to deal with volcanic
eruptions, such as the implementation of structural works,
it is necessary to know the types of volcanic phenomena
and the extent of the damage. Volcanic hazard maps
are produced as part of these efforts. They show thepossible extent of the damage, as estimated by numericalsimulations or other means, in the case of volcanoes thatare expected to cause serious social and physical damage
once they erupt. On the basis of these volcanic hazard
maps, volcanic disaster prevention maps, which show
evacuation sites and disaster-prevention information anddescribe eruption phenomena, are prepared by municipalities to promote public response and evacuation activities(Fig. 1).
3. Sabo Plan for Urgent Measures for Volcanic Disaster
Reduction
3.1 Outline of the Plan

It is difficult to fully prevent sediment-related disasters
resulting from volcanic eruptions, even if appropriate
measures—including the development of facilities—are
systematically taken on the basis of volcanic sedimentand erosion control plans. This is because it is difficult
to determine the occurrence of volcanic eruption activity
or its scale, which can become very large. Therefore,
Sabo Plans for Urgent Measures for Volcanic Disaster
Reduction (hereinafter “Volcano Disaster Sabo Plans”)
are formulated by the sediment control personnel of thecentral and prefectural governments to minimize thedamage caused by volcanoes that are highly likely to erupt
and for which a high risk of sediment-related damage isassociated with the volcanic eruption.
A Volcano Disaster Sabo Plan should be produced
for each volcano that is expected to have serious social
impacts if it erupts. As of 2012, twenty-nine volcanoes
are the targets of this planning. The volcanoes are:* Deputy Director General, Department of Land Management, Tottori Prefectural Government Office
The last position; Sabo Planning Division, Sabo Department, Water and Disaster Management Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism－ 121 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Maximum flow depth(m)Fig. 1 (Top) Example of a volcano hazard map (results of a simulation of snowmelt-type volcanic mudflows on Fujisan).
(Bottom) Example of a volcanic disaster prevention map (for the city of Fujiyoshida).

Meakandake, Tokachidake, Tarumaesan, Usuzan,
Hokkaido-Komagatake, Iwakisan, Akita-Yakeyama, AkitaKomagatake, Iwatesan, Chokaisan, Zaozan, Azumayama,
Adatarayama, Bandaisan, Nasudake, Asamayama,

Kusatsu-Shiranesan, Izu-Oshima, Miyakejima, NiigataYakeyama, Yakedake, Ontakesan, Fujisan, Tsurumidake
and Garandake, Kujusan, Unzendake, Asosan,
Kirishimayama and Sakurajima.

－ 122 －

Actions for Volcanic Disaster Management — S. YAMAGUCHI
Urgent installation ofequipment to monitor
volcanic activities

Assumption ofdanger zones byreal time hazard
mapping

Urgent hard
works

Storage of emergency equipment
and materials

Establishment of
information communication system using
optical fiber cable etc.

Setting up thebuffer zone at thefoot of the volcano

Measures to be taken during
the non-disaster time

Strengthening thefunction of the
volcanic disasterprevention center

Measures to be taken urgently
at the time of eruption

Fig. 2 Outline of the Sabo Plan for Urgent Measures for Volcanic Disaster Reduction.

3.2

Position of the Sabo Plan for Urgent Measures for
Volcanic Disaster Reduction, and Study System

Disaster-prevention measures should be implemented
through the coordinated action of relevant organizations, as they involve a variety of activities, including
monitoring and observation of volcanic activity, provisionof volcano-related information, protection of residents’
lives by promoting evacuation or setting restrictedzones, and prevention or mitigation of damage to social
assets or housing. Therefore, it is important to preparea Volcano Disaster Sabo Plan through the coordinationof measures from relevant organizations and of disasterprevention plans from relevant municipalities. Given theirimportance, Volcano Disaster Sabo Plans are examinedby a study group composed of members of relevant organizations, including the Meteorological Agency, the Self
Defense Forces, fire departments, and police; administrative agencies, including prefectures and municipalities;
and volcano specialists. The sediment-control sectionsof The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport andTourism’s Regional Development Bureaus and prefectural
governments take the initiative.
3.3

Contents of the Sabo Plan for Urgent Measures for
Volcanic Disaster Reduction

Designed to produce the maximum effect in case of
emergency, a Volcano Disaster Sabo Plan consists of two
sections, namely actions taken in emergency situations
and actions taken in times of non-disaster to prepare
for emergency situations. Emergency actions include
emergency structural measures, such as reinforcement of
sediment-control weirs or construction or improvement ofsand pockets or training dikes, and emergency nonstructural measures, such as urgent installation of equipment
to monitor volcanic activity or the assumption of danger

zones through real-time hazard mapping. Preparatory
actions include stockpiling of necessary materials andequipment, such as concrete block, or strengthening of thefunctions of volcanic disaster prevention centers (Fig. 2).
4. Emergency Survey Based on the Sediment Disasters
Prevention Act
4.1 Outline of the Survey

Appropriate advice based on advanced technology
is essential for a municipality to make an appropriate
judgment on the evacuation of residents in a situation
where a large-scale sediment-related disaster is imminent
owing to, for example, a volcanic eruption. The Act for
Partial Revision of the Act on Promotion of Sediment
Disaster Countermeasures for Sediment Disaster Prone
Areas (herein the “Revised Sediment Disasters PreventionAct”) was approved by the 176th Cabinet (ExtraordinaryDiet) on 17 November 2010. This revision specifies thatthe central government must conduct emergency surveys
on the debris flows that could be caused by a volcanic
eruption and notify relevant municipalities and the generalpublic of the estimated extent and timing of the damage.
4.2

Case Example: Emergency Survey of the Eruptionof. Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake)

Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake), which started erupting
on 19 January 2011, had a full-scale magma eruption on
the 26th of the same month and began explosive eruptions
on the 27th.
The Kyushu Regional Development Bureau, Ministryof Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism had its sedimentcontrol personnel survey the amount of fallen volcanic ash
on 27 January. The survey team identified those mountainstreams that satisfied the emergency survey requirements
as those likely to be damaged by debris flows torrent－ 123 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Extent of area with ash
falls over 1cm thick
Debris-flow torrent to mountain streams, as revealed by
the emergency survey

Simulation ofthe area highly
likely to be damaged
by debris
flowsFig. 3 Example of the status of emergency survey and sediment-related disaster emergency information.

and started an emergency survey ahead of the official
enactment of the Revised Sediment Disasters Prevention
Act. The emergency survey was conducted by the Bureau
with technical support from the Public Works ResearchInstitute. It included an analysis of the extent of the area
highly likely to be damaged by the flood of debris flows.
On the basis of data on the debris flows that occurredfollowing the eruption of Miyakejima, the Bureau also
proposed a criterion of an hourly rainfall of 4 mm as thetrigger for a debris flow. Information on the analyzed
extent and timing was provided to Miyakonojyo City,

Takaharu Town, and Miyazaki Prefecture as reference
information to help issue evacuation advice to municipalities. With the official enactment of the Revised
Sediment Disasters Prevention Act on 1 May, the survey
was officially designated a regulatory emergency survey,
and the emergency information on sediment-related
disaster was then provided to the relevant municipalities. The rainfall criterion was revised on a timely basis
by considering the actual rainfall data and the status ofsediment movement (Fig. 3).

－ 124 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Technical Efforts to Prepare Volcanic Hazard Maps
Nobuo ANYOJI*

1. Erosion Control in Volcanic Areas and Volcanic Hazard
Maps

Volcanic eruption hazards are caused by movement ofash fall, pyroclastic flows, lava flows, or other volcanic
ejecta. If a mountain slope is covered with pyroclastic
material, the hydrologic environment will change. As aresult, even a small amount of rain can easily cause debris
flows or mudflows. Furthermore, repeated debris flows
may damage inhabited areas downstream in the long term.
The Erosion Control Works in Volcanic Areas isa disaster prevention project aimed at preventing or
reducing sediment hazard in volcanic areas. In this project,a volcanic hazard map is made to delineate those areas
estimated to be affected by sediment disasters associatedwith volcanic eruptions. The maps can be used to provide
basic information for examining the structural and nonstructural measures needed to prevent and minimize
disasters 1). To determine the specific areas where disasterprevention measures need to be taken, assumptions need
to be made about the areas that could be affected by eachphenomenon. It is also necessary to examine the types anddetails of measures that should be implemented according
to the damage level expected. Consequently, the Project’s
volcanic hazard maps need to enable users to change theirpredictions according to preconditions and also to quantify
these predictions. A numerical simulation that is based ona kinetic model of each phenomenon and that meets theserequirements is therefore applied to each map.
2. Technical Background to Preparation of Volcanic Hazard
Maps

The numerical simulation uses a 1-D calculation thattracks the sequential change in a flow’s profile and a 2-D
calculation that can express planar spread with changes ina transverse direction. The simulation basically employs
phenomena that can be modeled as “water flow” and“sediment transport” by using sediment hydraulics, namely
bed load by flood flows, mudflows created by applying
a turbulence model, and debris flows (aggregate flows).
In the wake of the Izu-Oshima and Unzendake eruptions,a lava flow based on a rheology model and a pyroclastic

flow (main body) model based on solid-gas multiphaseflow were added.
The dominant element of the flow characteristics ofa lava flow is a constant of a function of temperatureand viscosity that determines viscosity; the dominantelement of the flow characteristics of the main body of apyroclastic flow is a coefficient of dynamic friction related
to concentration. As these constants cannot be measured,approximate values determined by calibration calculations
are used.
Because the kinetic models for some types of sedimenttransport have not been fully developed, the constants
can be approximated on the basis of empirical rules. For
instance, phenomena such as large-scale debris avalanches
and pyroclastic surges, the interior structures of which are
difficult to reproduce in detail, are subject to this kind of
approximation.
These numerical calculations are largely attributable toprogress in computer calculation techniques over the last
20-odd years and in microtopography survey techniques.
If the initial conditions are not set properly for a numericalsimulation model, however, the expected results cannot
be obtained. Therefore, when a volcanic hazard map
is prepared the following items need to be properly
established as initial conditions for each phenomenon(Fig. 1).
The position of the crater (particularly in a lateral
eruption that generates a new crater), the scale of theeruption (total volume of ejecta), and the eruption rate arepreconditions for making a volcanic hazard map, rather
than initial conditions for numerical simulation. Thesesettings are largely attributable to the findings obtainedin volcanology. In volcanic geology, the phenomena
generated from each eruption event, their scales, andthe distribution of the ejecta have been investigated insurveys of eruption history. These results present various
potential conditions for volcanoes when their hazard maps
are under consideration. First, a literature survey of thevarious eruption events gives an outline of the events. A
field survey is then conducted to supplement the literature
survey. At this stage, capitalization on the expertise* Sabo and Landslide Technical Center－ 125 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013of volcanologists, together with consultant engineers
who have majored in volcanology, provides a wealthof information that is useful for the Erosion Control in
Volcanic Areas project.
Various surveys of Fujisan and analyses of this volcano
with the aim of developing a volcanic hazard map 2)
have been conducted as part of this cooperative effort.
Importantly, these tasks were performed extensively.
Specific activities include: (1) estimation of sources,
and calculation of volumes, of airborne tephra and lava
flows that had not been surveyed; (2) estimation of the
distributions and sources of pyroclastic flow deposits that
had not been fully surveyed; and (3) and confirmation ofrecords of the eruptions of peak craters. These activities
yielded substantial results in terms of volcanology 3).
Through a survey of historical documents, data on the
volcanic ash emitted by the 1707 Hoei eruption of Fujisan
and the damage it caused were compiled in terms oftime and space, and records on the movement of debris
flows and other deposits were checked. These activities
gave good results in terms of disaster management,

and the basic surveys were intensive. The results of theinvestigations were incorporated into Fujisan Hazard Map.
3. State of Preparation of Erosion Control Plans for Volcanic
Areas and Volcanic Hazard Maps

As mentioned above, the Sabo (Erosion Control)
Department examines and develops volcanic hazard maps
to work out plans for erosion control in volcanic area
and other measures. Erosion Control Plans for Volcanic
Areas and Sabo plan for urgent measures for volcanic
disaster reduction during Volcanic Eruptions are currently
under consideration for 29 active volcanoes in Japan,
where the constant volcanic activity affects wide-ranging
settlements, built-up areas, and public facilities. Volcanic
hazard maps for all of these volcanoes were examined, andtheir data were submitted to risk management departments.
As a result, many volcanic disaster management maps
have now been published. The Erosion Control Plans for
Volcanic Areas are now being reviewed to serve as masterplans for the Sabo plan for urgent measures for volcanic
disaster reduction during Volcanic Eruptions, which will

Survey of eruptive
disaster records

Illustration of sediment
movement records

Investigation of volcanic
characteristics and type,
frequency, and scale ofphenomena

Selection of disasterrecords or phenomena
fully assumed to cause
disasters

Determination of phenomena to be incorporated in
the volcano hazard maps,
and their scale

Setting of numericalsimulation conditions andexamination area

Digital maps

Setting of conditions fornumerical simulation ofeach phenomenon

Determination of simulationcase parameters andhydrograph or eruption rate

Checking andsummarization of thecalculations resulting fromthe numerical simulation

Hazard map based on
numerical simulations

Preparation of a volcano
hazard map for eachphenomenon

Volcanic hazard map foreach phenomenon

Integration of volcano
hazard maps

Volcanic disastermanagement map
Disasterprevention
information

Fig. 1 Procedure for preparation of volcanic hazard maps.

－ 126 －

Technical Efforts to Prepare Volcanic Hazard Maps — N. ANYOJI

be prepared to formulate emergency measures in the eventof eruptions.
Volcanic disaster management maps for the following
volcanoes 4) have been made public on the basis of
information provided under the Erosion Control project:• Hokkaido: Meakandake, Tokachidake, Tarumaesan,
Usuzan, and Hokkaido-Komagatake• To h o k u r e g i o n : I w a k i s a n , I w a t e s a n , A k i t a Komagatake, Zaozan, Chokaisan, Bandaisan,Azumayama, and Adatarayama• Kanto region: Nasudake, Kusatsu-Shiranesan,
Asamayama, Izu-Oshima, and Miyakejima• Hokuriku and Chubu regions: Niigata-Yakeyama,
Fujisan, and Ontakesan• Kyushu: Asosan, Kujusan, Tsurumidake andGarandake, Yufudake, Kirishimayama, and Sakurajima
The volcanic disaster management maps for Asosan andAsamayama are being revised to meet the volcanic alertlevels announced by the Japan Meteorological Agency.
4. Future Volcanic Hazard Maps: Issue of Real-time Hazard Maps

The preparation and release of volcanic hazard maps
and disaster management maps for our country’s major
active volcanoes are almost completed. Some of themaps have been revised, but the volcanic hazard maps for
those volcanoes that erupt infrequently remain unrevised.
Volcanic disaster management maps are closely linked
to the upgrading of evacuation plans and other disastermanagement strategies. For this reason, we need to discuss
how to use the maps to provide appropriate information
to local residents and tourists. Consequently, a hazard
map that reflects various scenarios without the constraints
imposed by conventional forms of hazard map is required.
Real-time hazard maps are expected to be the nextgeneration of volcanic hazard maps. The concept of
the real-time hazard map has been derived from recent
progress in techniques for observing the meteorological,hydrological, and terrestrial phenomena leading to hazards.
These advances allow immediate acquisition of observed
data and faster numerical calculations based on these data.
The quick publication of hazard areas on the basis of thelatest data is expected to be used to tackle various natural
hazards.
Volcanic real-time hazard maps have been examinedparticularly in the field of the erosion control in volcanic
areas and have been classified into pre-analysis and realtime-analysis types (Fig. 2).
The pre-analysis system stores calculated results asa database and searches for a hazard map with similar
conditions on the basis of eruptive and sediment
movement. The system has been developed to reduce thetime required for numerical simulations.
If an eruptive event or sediment movement is predicted,
then the real-time analysis system will execute a
calculation based on the conditions of the predicted andwill prepare a hazard map. Fig. 3 shows the procedureused to prepare real-time hazard maps.
Real-time hazard maps are used for structural and nonstructural emergency measures. As the representative
conditions and the precision required vary with thetypes and details of the measures taken, it is efficient todetermine in advance the representative conditions thatwill be required by the end-users of the real-time hazardmap5) (Table 1).
5. Future Development

The volcanic hazard maps that were prepared under the
Erosion Control project are to be revised with changes
such as new eruptions or drastic changes in topography.
The volcanic hazard maps for Usuzan and Miyakejima,
where eruptions occurred after volcanic hazard maps were
instituted, have been reassessed in light of the changes
occurring after these eruptions. To furnish the information
appropriate to such reassessment work, we need to further
improve the quality of the hazard maps by studying theReal-time hazard map

Pre-analysis type

Real-time analysis type

The pre-analysis system stores calculated results as a database and searches
for a hazard map with similar conditions
on the basis of eruptive phenomena andsediment movements.

If an eruptive phenomenon or sediment
movement is predicted, then the realtime analysis system will execute a
calculation based on the conditions of
the predicted phenomenon and will
prepare a hazard map.

Fig. 2 Types of real-time hazard maps.

－ 127 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

results of volcanological research and reviewing the
kinetic models of sediment movement.
It is important to ensure that reexamination of
conventional volcanic disaster management maps on
the basis of volcanic hazard maps promotes further
improvement of the volcanic disaster prevention schemes.
System start

Numerical simulation
Preparation for
calculation

References

Urgent survey
Topographical change
Survey of juvenile ejecta
Conditions of Snow cover
Conditions of lava emission
Other

Execution of
calculation
Verification of
the calculation

Output1) Guidelines for Preparation of Volcano Hazard Maps
(draft).
2) Cabinet Office, Fire and Disaster Management
A g e n c y o f M i n i s t r y o f I n t e r n a l A ff a i r s a n dCommunications, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure,
Transport and Tourism, and Meteorological Agency(2004): Report of Committee for Review of the Mt.
Fuji Volcanic Hazard Map.
3) “Fuji Volcano,” edited by the Editing Committee(Volcanological Society of Japan) (2007): Fuji
Volcano, Yamanashi Institute of Environmental
Sciences.
4) ANYOJI, N. (2009): Preparation of Volcano
Hazard Map and Damage Assumption, Introduction
to Volcanic Engineering. edited by Research
Subcommittee on Volcanic Engineering, Committeeof Geotechnical Engineering, Japan Society of Civil
Engineers, Maruzen, 116–128.
5) ANYOJI, N. (2010): Volcano disaster management anduse of real-time hazard maps. Fire Science No.102,
Institute for Fire Safety and Disaster Preparedness.

Provision of hazard map

Fig. 3 Procedure for review of real-time hazard maps 4).

Table 1 Application of real-time hazard maps for disaster prevention schemes, and their required precision5).
Applications
Emergency
evacuation

Details
Representative item of RTHM
Required precision
Evacuation implementation Extent of impact from hazardous Evacuation (all-clear) areas must be set to orderand cancellation with changes events.
or lift of evacuation area, a size of digital map ofin the phases of volcanic Arrival time of the phenomenon. about 50 m that can mark a township boundary is
activity.
needed.
The arrival time of the phenomenon is expressedin minutes.
The results of calculations are required
Immediately.

Declaration
off-limits

Restriction of Access to areas Extent of impact from hazardous The outer boundary of the affected area is exat risk of dangerous eruption events.
pressed, and a road map is superimposed on it.
phenomena; road blocking;cancellation of these measures.
Removal of Sediment from Extent of impact from hazardous The affected area varies with the planar shape ofSabo dams to prevent inunda- events.
the structure. The mesh size that can express thetion with sediment and water, Arrival time of the phenomenon. structure is normally 10 to 20 m.
and construction of emergency
training levees etc.
The time of a phenomenon’s arrival at a con-Emergency
erosion control
works

struction site is a critical element for construction
safety. Consequently, it must be expressed inminutes. The time of a slow phenomenon such aslava flow must be expressed in days.
Because the mesh size becomes very small, thecalculation time sometimes increases to about 1day.

－ 128 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcanic Disaster Measures of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan
Tetsuro IMAKIIRE*

1. Volcanic Activity Observation by the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan

Charged with monitoring active volcanoes throughout
Japan, the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI)
analyzes observational data from GEONET (a GNSSbased continuous monitoring system), GPS-based control
points, and a remote GNSS-based volcano deformation
monitoring system (REGMOS) to continuously monitors
the earth’s crust in 3D with millimeter accuracy. In 2008,
GSI began conducting integrated analysis of GPS data
incorporating the GPS observations of other institutions,and this gives us the ability to monitor crustal deformation
around volcano with even greater accuracy. With thissystem, GSI is able to monitor the process of buildup toan eruption, and should be able to anticipate movementsof magma with a high degree of temporal and spatial
accuracy.

Izu-Oshima is continuously monitored by a geodetic
monitoring system, and crustal deformation measurements(leveling, GNSS surveying, gravity surveying) areperiodically performed for 15 key volcanoes. GSI has also
been continuously monitoring of geomagnetism aroundFujisan since December 2001.
In areas where volcanic activity is intense due tocontraction of the volcanic cone or large accumulationsin the crater, surface deformation is estimated using SARinterferometric analysis from a satellite or aircraft. Finally,in order to detect crustal deformation around volcanoes or
movements of magma deep underground, GSI conducts
volcanic deformation modeling using GNSS and otherobservational data.

GNSS receiverPower supply
monitor
GNSS antennaCommunication
deviceUPS
Backup battery(24hours)

Tiltmeter

HeaterLightningarresterFig. 3 Automatic observation station (Izu-Oshima).

Site diﬀerences (total magnec force)

Fig. 1 GPS-based control points.

From Mar. 2002 to Oct. 2012

765
760
755
750
745
740
735
730
725
665
660
655
650
645
640
635
630
625
-80
-85
-90
-95

-100
-105
-110
-115
-120
2002/03 2003/03 2004/03 2005/03 2006/03 2007/03 2008/03 2009/03 2010/03 2011/03 2012/03

䖃䠖FJI(GSI) 䠉 FJ1(ERI)

Fig. 2 External view of REGMOS.

䕔䠖FUJ(GSI) 䠉 FJ1(ERI)䕦䠖FUJ 䠉 FJI

Fig. 4 Magnetic total force intensity observation results (Fujisan).

* Geospatial Information Authority of Japan－ 129 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013
)URP >) )LQDO6ROXWLRQ @>5 5DSLG6ROXWLRQ @7R
From 2009/12/01 - 2009/12/10
To 2010/05/01 - 2010/05/10
km
0)URP'HFWR0D\
4XDQWLW\RIH[SDQVLRQ :HVW6LGH NP
4XDQWLW\RIH[SDQVLRQ (DVW6LGH NP
4XDQWLW\RIH[SDQVLRQ 7RWDO NP

5

1,.509୓⮃PP‫ە‬P‫ە‬‫ە‬

32° 00'
ฟỈ9
㧗༓✑9
୰ᓅP‫ە‬
࠼ࡧࡢ
Cal.

r

‫ە‬

130° 45'131° 00'

131° 15')L[HG6WDLWLRQ㸸
&KDQJH6RXUFH

9
㧗༓✑‫ە‬9
୰ᓅ

1,.5+9
ዀᏲྎ

‫ە‬

‫ە‬


∾ᅬP‫ە‬‫ە‬P
㒔ᇛ㸰

‫ە‬

‫ە‬

P‫ە‬9㟝ᓥ㧗ཎ‫ە‬P㒔ᇛ㸰‫ە‬
ᐑᓮ⏣㔝
ጸⰋ‫ە‬
ᵽ⬥


‫ە‬

‫ە‬

P
㞙ே
㒔ᇛ

‫ە‬

‫ە‬


㮵ඣᓥ㒆ᒣ
໭㒓
ᱜᓥ

NP


‫ە‬


ᅵ

P‫ە‬9㧗༓✑ᓠ:
P
㧗༓✑Ἑཎ :
ᚚụ

‫ە‬

‫ۼ‬

‫ە‬

P‫ە‬:ᚚụ P
⥤P


㔝ᑼP

‫ە‬

‫ە‬

‫ە‬

‫ە‬

1,.5099୓⮃᪂⇞ᒣ㡬
ᐑஅᇛ‫ە‬9
:
㧗༓✑Ἑཎ 㧗༓✑ᓠ‫ە‬
㹋㟝ᓥᒣ

31° 45'9㟝ᓥ㧗ཎ‫ە‬P

NP

Obs.

P

す㒔

‫ە‬
‫ە‬

‫ە‬

1cm


PዀᏲྎ‫ە‬P


㮵ඣᓥ኱ཱྀ

1,.5+99
᪂⇞ᒣ㡬P

‫ە‬

FP

‫ە‬
‫ە‬



㮵ඣᓥ⚟ᒣ

9஧ಛ ᾆ
அ๓‫ە‬‫ۼ‬Fixed Station:970836

‫ە‬

r

Fig. 5 GPS integrated analysis results and volcanic deformation model (upper left) (Kirishima volcano complex).

2011/02/10-2011/03/28

N-S

E-W

Before eruption(Mar.,2009)by Airbone laser scanning

After eruption(1,Feb.,2011)
by Airbone SAR

After eruption(7,Feb.,2011)
by Airbone SAR

Area of airbone SAR error

elevaon[m]

1450
1400

1,Feb.

1350
1300
7,Feb.

1250

䣅䣮䣱䣵䣧䢢䣶䣱䢢䣕䣣䣶䣧䣮䣮䣫䣶䣧䢯䢳䢳䢰䢺

Before eruption

1200

West

1150
0

Flig

ir.

ir.

mD

ht D

Bea

1
0
0

East
2
0
0

䢯䢷䢰䢻

䢲

䢷䢰䢻

䢳䢳䢰䢺

4
0
0

5
0
0

6
0
0

7
0
0

8
0
0

9
0
0

Cross secon of E-W direcon䣃䣹䣣䣻䢢䣨䣴䣱䣯䢢䣕䣣䣶䣧䣮䣮䣫䣶䣧䣎䣑䣕䢢䢪䣮䣫䣰䣧䢯䣱䣨䢯䣵䣫䣩䣪䣶䢫䢢䣥䣪䣣䣰䣩䣧䣝䣥䣯䣟

3
0
0

1
0
0
0

[m]

Area of airbone SAR error

elevaon[m]

1450
1400

1,Feb.

1350

㻭㼚㼍㼘㼥㼟㼕㼟㻌㼎㼥㻌㻳㻿㻵㻌㼒㼞㼛㼙㻌㻭㻸㻻㻿㻌㼞㼍㼣㻌㼐㼍㼠㼍㻌㼛㼒㻌㻶㻭㼄㻭㻘㻌㻹㻱㼀㻵

1300
7,Feb.

1250

Before eruption

1200

Fig. 6 Crustal deformation at Ioto detected by SARinterferometric analysis.

South

1150
0

1
0
0

North
2
0
0

3
0
0

4
0
0

5
0
0

6
0
0

7
0
0

8
0
0

9
0
0

1
0
0
0 [m]

Cross secon of N-S direconFig. 7 Airborne SAR observation results of Kirishimayama(Shinmoedake).

－ 130 －

Volcanic Disaster Measures of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan — T. IMAKIIREThe GNSS and other observational data and estimated crustal deformation results are reported to the
Meteorological Agency’s Volcanic Eruption Prediction
Liaison Council and are also made available to the public
on the GSI’s website. We continue to monitor recent volcanic activity such as the spectacular magma eruption in
January 2011 of Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake), volcanic
activity on Ioto, and elsewhere.
2. Creating Basic Volcano-Related Information and Making it Available to the Public

GSI is committed to preparing hazard maps and otherbasic disaster management information and making thisinformation available to the general public. Thus far, GSI
has published Volcanic Base Maps for 33 volcanoes aswell as Volcanic Land Condition Maps for 19 volcanoes
based on volcanic land condition surveys. In addition,
the GSI also conducts rapid-response field surveys in theevent of an actual eruption, and quickly produces Ejecta
Distribution Maps and Damage Condition Maps.
The Volcanic Base Maps are large-scale topographicalmaps drawn to 1/5,000 or 1/10,000 scale, with contour
lines at 5-meter intervals. They include detailed features—
summit craters, lateral cones, slopes, ridges, valleys, andso on—and highlight mudslide control dams and otherdisaster prevention facilities. The Volcanic Base Maps

are a basic resource (base map) used to predict mudslide
damage in volcanic areas, debris flows associated withvolcanic activity, help formulate countermeasures toprotect observation facilities from damage, conceive
emergency measures in the event of eruptions, and provide
valuable resources for studying volcanoes and predicting
volcanic eruptions.
The Volcanic Land Condition Maps are easy-on-theeyes multicolor printed maps with scales ranging from
1/10,000 to 1/50,000. They show the topology shaped bypast volcanic activity, distribution of ejecta (lava flows,
pyroclastic flows, scoria cones, debris avalanches, andso on), and the present state of the volcano (state of riverdissections, artificial deformed ground, disaster-related
facilities and institutions, locations of river construction
projects).
All of these resources—Volcanic Base Maps, Digital
Elevation Models, Volcanic Land Condition Maps, andother Volcanic Topology Classification Data that quantifies
land features and distribution of ejecta caused by volcanic
activity—are readily available to the public under theheading “Volcanic Maps” on GSI’s website.
Volcanic Maps URL: http://www1.gsi.go.jp/geowww/
Volcano/volcano.html

Fig. 8 Volcanic Base Map (Kurikomayama).

Fig. 9 Volcanic Land Condition Map (Ontakesan).

－ 131 －

－ 132 －Satsuma-Iojima
Satsuma-Takeshima

Kirishimayama

AsosanNasudake

Adatarayama

ZaozanKurikomayama

IwatesanIwakisanSakurajima

Satsuma-Iojima(Satsuma-Takeshima)

Kirishimayama

Miyakejima

FujisanIzu-Oshima

AsosanAdatarayama

Kurikomayama

Miyakejima

Kuju-Renzan
Unzendake

Tarumaesan

Meakandake/Oakandake

Hokkaido-Komagatake

Kusatsu-Shiranesan

Bandaisan

UsuzanTokachidake

Izu-Oshima

Hakoneyama

Ontakesan

Fig. 10 Current availability of Volcanic Base Maps (left) and Volcanic Land Condition Maps (right).

Suwanosejima

Sakurajima

Kuju-Renzan
Unzendake

Tsurumidake

FujisanHigashi-Izu-Tanseikazangun

Meakandake

Hokkaido-Komagatake
agatake

Kusatsu-Shiranesan
Asamayama
Yakedake
OntakesanAzumayama
BandaisanAkita-Yakeyama
Akita-Komagatake
Chokaisan

UsuzanTarumaesannTokachidake

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Observation of Volcanoes in the Seas around Japan by the Japan Coast Guard
Koji ITO*

1. Introduction

Many volcanic islands and submarine volcanoes are
distributed in the seas around Japan. These volcanoes,
given the abundant volume of water surrounding them,
can trigger phenomena different from those associatedwith terrestrial volcanoes; such phenomena may include
phreatomagmatic explosions, the rise of floating pumice tothe sea surface, and tsunamis and may threaten islanders’lives and nearby ships. To secure the safe passage ofships, the Japan Coast Guard has monitored and observed
such volcanoes since its inauguration in 1948. This
report provides general information about the monitoring
activities of the Japan Coast Guard.
2. Daigo Kaiyomaru Accident at Myojinsho Reef

Myojinsho Reef includes an active volcano locatedabout 400 km south of Tokyo. The post-caldera volcano
developed along the edge of the north-eastern side of the
Myojinsho Caldera. Volcanic activity has been noticed
a couple of times throughout recorded history. A newisland with a long axis of about 200 m was formed in
1946, but it later disappeared through wave erosion. In
September 1952, upon receiving from the fishing boat
Daijyuichi Myojinmaru a radio communication aboutsubmarine volcanic activity, the survey ship Daigo
Kaiyomaru of the Hydrographic Department of the
Maritime Safety Agency (the predecessor of the Japan
Coast Guard), with university researchers on board, put
to sea to identify the location of another new island (orreef) in the same area (Fig. 1). However, radio contact
with Daigo Kaiyomaru was later lost. Analysis of debris
floating around Myojinsho Reef indicated that Daigo
Kaiyomaru, with a total of 31 souls on board, had beencapsized by the blast of the volcanic explosion. Later, theU.S. Navy’s SOFAR (Sound Fixing and Ranging) channel
data suggested that the explosion had occurred at 12:21
on 24 September. Observing active volcanic islands andsubmarine volcanoes was therefore extremely dangerous
when survey ships were the only means available.
Thereafter, volcanic activity in the seas of the southern

Fig. 1 Daigo Kaiyomaru. It is 34 m long, weighs 280 t, andwas completed in 1943. As a survey vessel for the
Maritime Safety Agency of Japan it helped to restore
Japanese marine transportation. It was destroyed in a
volcanic accident near Myojinsho Reef in 1952.

Japanese islands remained relatively calm. However, inthe 1970s, volcanic activity in such areas as the MinamiHiyoshi Seamount, Fukutoku-Oka-no-Ba Volcano, andNishinoshima Island increased and was observed by the
YS-11-based airplanes newly introduced by the Maritime
Safety Agency.
3. Regular and Extraordinary Airborne Observations

Airborne observations are extremely important forlearning the current status of volcanic activity in real time.
The Japan Coast Guard monitors about 30 major volcanicislands and submarine volcanoes (Fig. 2). It has thecapacity to observe the volcanoes of the southern Japaneseislands on a once-a-month basis; this includes the regularbiannual observations and other regular observations by
the 3rd Regional Coast Guard Headquarters and the SelfDefense Forces. In the southwestern Japanese islands,
the 10th and 11th Regional Coast Guard Headquarters
make airborne observations of volcanic activity during
their airborne patrols. This is in addition to the Japan
Coast Guard’s regular annual observations. The Japan
Coast Guard makes extraordinary observations when

* Director for Volcano ResearchTechnology Planning and International Affairs Division, Hydrographic and Oceanographic Department, Japan Coast Guard－ 133 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

4. Basic Surveys by Survey Vessels

Fig. 2 Volcanic islands and submarine volcanoes to bemonitored by the Japan Coast Guard.

any volcanic activity is spotted during these regularobservations or is reported by fishing boats. In recent
years, it has started to monitor volcanoes by using
satellite images through joint study with JAXA (the Japan
Aerospace Exploration Agency).
Major airborne observation methods include visual,geomagnetic, and thermal-infrared. Visual observations
include eruption clouds, volcanic gases, and extent andcolor of discolored water. Thermal-infrared observations
include the temperature inside craters and help to reveal
the current status and activity of the magma. These data
are sent as part of various navigational warning messages,
including NAVAREA messages, and are also reported to
the Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic
Eruptions.

The Japan Coast Guard performs basic surveys by using
survey vessels to collect basic data on volcanic islands
and submarine volcanoes, including volcanic topography,
the nature of volcanic ejecta, geomagnetic and gravitation
anomalies, and crustal structure. It has surveyed 10
volcanoes since 1998. The survey data are used to compile
the Basic Information Map of Submarine Volcanoes
and are also used for the Database of the Maritime andSubmarine Volcanoes in Japan.
By understanding volcanic topography, we can estimate
the eruptive style, the eruption history, and the scope ofthe eruption impact. The recent rapid development of
the multi-beam echo sounder has contributed greatly to
our detailed understanding of the volcanic topography ofthe volcanic islands and submarine volcanoes (Fig. 3).
By accumulating data on geomagnetic and gravitation
anomalies when volcanoes are quiescent and comparing
them with data collected during eruptions, we can predictthe locations and movements of the magma and fluids
inside the volcanoes.
Vessels used for the surveys include the survey
vessels such as Shoyo and Meiyo. We also use survey
boats Manbo II and Jinbei (Fig. 4), which are available
for remote, unmanned navigation or pre-programmed
navigation in shallow seas or where manned survey ships
cannot enter because of volcanic activity. These boats areequipped with echo sounders and water-sampling bottles
for studying topography and taking samples of discoloredwater.

Fig. 3 Shaded relief map of the Kaikata Seamountin the Ogasawara Islands Chain. Notethe horseshoe caldera on the eastern
mountainside and the small caldera at thesummit. By understanding the volcanic
topography, we can estimate the eruptive
style and the type and scale of the disasterthat may result from an eruption.

－ 134 －

Observation of Volcanoes in the Seas around Japan by the Japan Coast Guard — K. ITO

Fig. 4 The manned/unmanned survey boat Manbo II. It is
usually mounted on a large survey ship and used inplaces the mother ship cannot enter.

5. Future Issues

The future issues surrounding the observation of
volcanic islands and submarine volcanoes include, firstand foremost, increasing observation activities. Japan
has many volcanic islands and submarine volcanoes,
but the Japan Coast Guard currently observes only thosevolcanoes that are most active and highly likely to erupt in
the near future. As volcanic eruptions can subside within acouple of days, some may begin and end without anyone’s

knowledge. Establishing an undersea cable-based real-timemonitoring system is one way to solve such a problem andexpand the scope of observations in space and time. Under
the VENUS Project led by the Science and Technology
Agency in the 1990s, an attempt was made to monitor
the Earth’s environment by connecting various items ofobservation equipment to the undersea coaxial cable laidfrom Guam to Okinawa. The Maritime Safety Agency also
participated in the project and deployed hydrophone arrays
to capture the eruption sounds of submarine volcanoes.
Unfortunately, because of equipment troubles, the projectfinished before achieving its goal. This technology needs
to be put to practical use in the near future.
Aerial observations of submarine volcanoes are often
hampered by the presence of the sea: the status of theareas around craters and eruption phenomena often cannot
be directly observed. In such cases, the discolored water isobserved instead to evaluate volcanic activity. Observation
activities currently include keeping records of the presenceof discolored water and of the extent and color of thechange. However, the influence of subjective views on
the observation results cannot be ruled out because of theheavy dependence on visual observation. An attempt has
begun to capture images of the water with multi-band
cameras and thus determine the levels of volcanic activity
by quantifying the color changes. However, this system is
yet to be put into practical use in predicting eruptions. Asa first step, we need to collect sufficient quantitative dataon these color changes for each volcano so as to identify
their relationship with the level of volcanic activity.

－ 135 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

AIST’s Research on Volcanology
Hiroshi SHINOHARA* and Yoshihiro ISHIZUKA*

1. Introduction

The National Institute of Advanced Industrial Scienceand Technology (AIST) produces and compiles geologicalinformation to enhance our society’s safety and security.
AIST also works on technological development to create
solutions to various problems. These solutions include
mitigation of damage by natural disasters, preservation of
the global environment, and development of resources andenergy on the basis of the compiled information. Amongthese fields, geological research to mitigate damage by
volcanic disasters is the major research theme. To reduce
volcanic damage it is indispensable to evaluate and predictchanges in volcanic activity and eruptions. In this respect,
AIST conducts geological surveys to understanding andevaluating past eruption history, frequency of eruption,and changes in volcanic activity and modeling of magma
supply systems, magma ascent and eruption sequences,which are the causes of the activity changes, by usinggeophysical observations and materials science analysesof rocks and volcanic gas with the aim to refine thetechniques to predict volcanic activity changes. This
paper focuses on the three research activities currently
conducted by AIST: (2) geological maps of volcanoes; (3)researches for prediction of volcanic activity changes; and(4) database of active volcanoes.
2. Geological Maps of Volcanoes

Each volcano has its own characteristics, and eruptions
often follow a similar pattern. Study of the history of
past activity of a volcano is therefore important to infer
the style and scale of possible future eruptions. AIST
conducts regular detailed field surveys and compiles theresults into geological maps to reveal the past histories
of volcanic activity. These geological maps are useful tounderstand the possible eruption sites, eruptions styles
and areas affected by the future eruptions (Fig. 1). There
are two series of geological map of volcanoes. The
Geological Map of Volcanoes focuses on active volcanoes
and the 1:50,000-scale Quadrangle Series covers theentire country. The first Geological Map of Volcanoes was
published in 1981 for Sakurajima, issued for 16 volcanoes
and was revised. Since 2000, seven maps have been added

to the series, namely Kirishima, Miyakejima, Iwate,
Kuchinoerabujima, Usu (2nd edition), Tarumae, andTokachidake. All of the rank A volcanoes (the most activeones) will be covered by the Geological Map of Volcanoes
with the issue of the map of Suwanosejima, scheduled
for fiscal year 2012. Since 2000, the 1:50,000-scale
Quadrangle Series of the area including active volcanoes
were issued for Midagahara, Hakkodasan, Numazawa,
Kaimondake, Ikeda and Yamagawa, Nishinoshima, andHarunasan.
To determine the history of activity and growth ofa volcano it is essential to establish an accurate time
axis of eruption dates. AIST developed a method todate the young volcanic rocks and applied to various
volcanoes These results are indispensable for productionof geological maps and improve the accuracy of thegeological maps and systematic compile of the eruptiondata.
We combine various techniques such as drilling, trenchand sea bottom surveys, in addition to the conventionalsurface geologic surveys, to understand the history of
volcanic activity. For example, the eruption history of
Izu-Oshima obtained by ground surface survey as revised
based on the results of the drilling and trench surveys. The
comparison of the geological surveys on the island and in
the sea revealed the long-distance movement of magma.
These are very important outcomes for improvement of
future geological maps.
3. Researches for Prediction of Volcanic Activity Changes

We are systematically conducting various researches
based mainly on materials science so that we candetermine the magma supply system that controls avolcano’s history of activity or eruption changes and theprogress in magma rise and eruption. The major research
topics are as follows.
Lithological analysis of ejecta is effective in clarifying
the composition of the magma that characterizes thevolcanic activity, the evolution and differentiation of themagma before eruption, and magma mixing. The analysis
conducted by AIST is based particularly on analyticalstudies of major components and volatile materials in* Institute of Geology and Geoinformation, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)－ 137 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Fig. 1 Geological map of Tokachidake Volcano (Ishizuka et al., 2010).

the melt inclusions in the phenocrysts in volcanic rockor the microstructures of the phenocrysts. Because thesesamples are very small, they are analyzed by using anelectron microprobe or secondary ion mass analyzer. In
addition, magma reaction experiments are conducted withan internally heated gas pressure high-temperature highpressure apparatus to quantitatively evaluate the results
obtained. This analysis provides us with various findingssuch as follows;
For an example, the magma ejected by the eruptionof Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) in 2011 was mixed
repeatedly for a long time in the magma chamber andunderwent another mixing immediately before eruption,and this final mixing triggered the eruption.
Volatile components in the magma are the major driving
force of explosive eruption. At the same time, the emissionof volcanic gas onto the ground reflects the degassing
process of the magma underground.

Fig. 2 Melt inclusions of basaltic magma in an olivine
phenocryst in Miyakejima ejecta emitted on 18 August
2000 (photo taken by Genji Saito).

－ 138 －

AIST’s Research on Volcanology — H. SHINOHARA and Y. ISHIZUKA

PumpBattery
Barometer

H2 Sensor

Data Logger

Infrared H2O/CO2
Analyzer
H2S/SO2 Gas Sensors

Fig. 3 Multi-GAS (multi-component gas analyzer system).

We observe the gases from active volcanoes to monitor
volcanic gas discharge activity and analyze the degassing
process of magma and changes in hydrothermal systems.
Conventionally, the major means of observing volcanic
gas components is direct sampling and analysis; thesubject of observation is therefore limited to fumarolicactivity. However, we have newly developed an apparatus
and method for observations of volcanic smoke to measure
volcanic gas components (Fig. 3). This system enables us
to observe the gases from various volcanoes within andoutside Japan. It also allows us to quantify the componentsof large-scale volcanic gas discharges, such as that in
the case of Miyakejima. Thanks to this new technique,advances are being made in evaluating changes in theprocess of volcanic gas supply as a result of changes involcanic activity. As the apparatus is designed to conduct
automatic measurements, it can be installed on a volcano
for long-term observations. Various improvement of theapparatus and techniques are being performed to realize
continuous observation of volcanic gas.
Changes in volcanic activity—including increased
underground thermal activity, increased supply of volcanicgas, and intrusion of magma—initially cause changes in
the underground hydrothermal system. These changes

can be detected on the surface as the changes in thermal
activity on the ground surface or in spontaneous potential
or resistance in the volcanic edifice. AIST conducts
continuous observations of spontaneous potential andrepeated observations of surface temperature distribution
to detect changes in volcanic activity by observinghydrothermal activity. We also conduct hydrothermal
system simulations to quantitatively evaluate thesechanges. Based particularly on comparisons between thesimulation results and observation results, we develop
quantitative models of hydrothermal systems that can
reproduce those of actual volcanoes to quantitatively
predict changes in hydrothermal systems under various
conditions caused by magma intrusion or supply of
volcanic gas.
4. Database of Active Volcanoes

The histories, the scales and styles of eruption of active
Japanese volcanoes are compiled and published as a
database to facilitate the understanding and usage of thegeological information. The database includes 10,000year eruption event data, geological maps of volcanoes,
detailed volcano data, and researches on active volcanoes.
Collection and editing of information is still under way.

－ 139 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

The 10,000-year eruption event data contains the eruption
date, eruption styles, types of sediments, sources ofsupply, and scale of eruption, taken from the documents
so far published, and those data are chronologicallycompiled in standardized format. The geological mapsof volcanoes and detailed volcano data explain in detailthe relevant geology of particularly active volcanoes withthe aid of drawings and photos. Researches on active
volcanoes overviews the studies on a volcano from aninterdisciplinary viewpoint covering geology, geophysics,

and geochemistry, so that readers can obtain a general
understanding of volcanoes and is published for SatsumaIojima and Usuzan.
Reference－ 140 －

1) Ishizuka, Y., Nakagawa, M. and Fujiwara, S. (2010):
Geological Map of Tokachidake Volcano. Geological
Map of Volcanoes, no.16, Geological Survey of Japan,
AIST, 8p.

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Fire and Disaster Management Agency and Local Government
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures
Hirobumi KOBAYASHI* and Noriko URATA*

1. Fire and Disaster Management Agency Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures

Today there are 110 active volcanoes in Japan. A
diverse range of volcanic phenomena have high riskfor destruction of life and property including volcanic
cinders, pyroclastic flows, lahars, lava flows, falling ash,debris flows, volcanic gas, landslides, and are sometime
accompanied by tsunami tidal waves. Various measures
have been taken in line with Act on Special Measures
for Active Volcanoes and other statutes to minimize theimpact of volcanic hazards, and the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency is charged with administering
government support to defray the infrastructure costs ofmaintaining evacuation facilities in towns and cities inareas where volcanoes are present. In light of volcanic
disasters that occurred in 2000—one at the base of Usuzan
and the other involving Miyakejima—the Fire and Disaster
Management Agency began holding Volcano Disasterrelated Prefectural Liaison Council meeting in 2001
to promote sharing of the latest information regarding
volcano disaster countermeasures and information held by
the various council member organizations.
Then in March 2008, the Cabinet Office, the Fire andDisaster Management Agency, the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), and theJapan Meteorological Agency drafted the “Volcano
Disaster Prevention Guidelines for Evacuation when
Eruptions Occur” based on discussions of volcanorelated information and evacuation plans with the aim of
constructing an effective volcano disaster management
system. The agencies called on all affected prefecturesand municipalities to hold council meetings during
normal times in order to set up Joint Countermeasure
Headquarters to deal with abnormal situations that arise
when eruptions occur, to develop specific and practicalevacuation plans, to educate their local populations, and toformulate volcano management countermeasures based on
the guidelines.

2. Local Government Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures
2.1 Organize Communication and Cooperation Frameworkwith Adjacent Local Governments and Relevant Institutions

It is critically important that local governments locatednear volcanoes establish wide-area communicationand collaboration systems in order that they implement
consistent evaluation polices, mountain climbing
restrictions, and other measures. Currently as of April
1, 2011, Councils have been established covering 25
volcanoes, and a coordination system has been put
in place for deliberating and coordinating regarding
information sharing, evacuation response policies, andother concerns. Of these, municipalities in the shadowsof 9 volcanoes—Tokachidake, Usuzan, HokkaidoKomagatake, Tarumaesan, Meakandake, KusatsuShiranesan, Unzendake, Asosan, and Kujusan (Ioyama)—
have already formed local disaster prevention councils inline with the Basic Act on Disaster Control Measures, andcities near 7 of these volcanoes have already developed aregional disaster plan covering contingency measures andother polices related to eruptions.
In order to implement volcanic disaster response
measures in a timely and accurate manner, local
governments near volcanoes are cooperating throughtheir Volcano Disaster Management Councils with local
weather stations that monitor volcanoes, erosion control
departments, volcanologists and other specialists, policeand fire departments, the Self-Defense Forces, Coast
Guard, and other support organizations.
2.2 Preparing and Distributing Volcanic Hazard Maps

Volcanic Hazard Maps are detailed maps showing therisks and vulnerabilities faced by different communities
in the event of an eruption. The maps are prepared by
the Volcano Disaster Management Councils and others,
and are extremely helpful to the local councils in drafting
evacuation plans. Another type of map called Volcanic
Disaster Mitigation Maps have also been prepared that
explain eruption warnings, evacuation planning, and otherdisaster-related information to the local population. By
widely distributing these maps to local residents under* The last position; Fire and Disaster Management Agency, Civil Protection and Disaster Management Department, Disaster Management
Division－ 141 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

normal conditions, it helps raise peoples’ awareness ofwhat they are supposed to do in the event of a disaster.
As of April 1, 2011, Volcanic Hazard Maps have beencreated for 41 volcanoes across Japan. Following theeruption of Usuzan and volcanic activity at Miyakejima,
the Fire and Disaster Management Agency has called on
local governments near volcanoes to step up their efforts
to create hazard maps, while stressing the importance ofraising peoples’ awareness and getting disaster prevention
information into the hands of all their local residents
before a major eruption occurs.

2.4 Practical Disaster Reduction Drills and Exercises

2.3 Planning for Volcano Disaster Management

A disaster PA (public address) radio network is mosteffective for conveying disaster-related information suchas eruption warnings and evacuation advisories to the
local population quickly and reliably. As of March 31,
2011, some 78.3 % of municipalities that are vulnerable
to volcanoes have deployed PA radio networks. Moreover,volcanic areas frequented by tourists and mountainclimbers have started to impose hiking/climbing andaccess regulations based on eruption warnings that reflect
volcanic activity, and are taking proactive steps to keep
local tourists informed of volcanic hazards.

Local governments near volcanoes must also implement
detailed disaster management strategies dealing withdifferent level eruption warnings as part of their local
disaster management planning that take the characteristics
of volcanoes, the geographic conditions, and the social
conditions of different communities into account.
Currently as of April 1, 2011, some 14 prefecturesand 115 municipalities have drafted volcanic hazard
countermeasure plans as a separate section or chapter of
their comprehensive regional disaster prevention plans, or
have updated their plans to incorporate the latest resources
and information about volcanoes*1).

Local governments in the shadow of volcanoes should
conduct regular disaster reduction drills and exercises inclose cooperation with the local fire department and otherlocal disaster-prevention organizations, and in 2010 four
prefectures conducted drills five times while municipalities
conduced volcanic hazard drills 48 times. In cases where
local governments are linked, the drills were conducted as
joint exercises*1).
2.5 Establish System for Conveying Information to Citizens and Tourists*1) That data from Iwaki, Miyagi, and Fukushima Prefectures havebeen excluded from the figures used in this report due to the devastating impact of the Great East Japan earthquake in March 2011.

－ 142 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcanic Disaster Management at Unzendake
Shinichi SUGIMOTO*

1. Introduction

It has been 21 years since the pyroclastic flow disasterthat followed the volcanic eruption of Unzendake on 17
November 1991. Volcanic activity continued for 4 years
and 3 months, from November 1990 to February 1995. On
the Shimabara Peninsula there has been steady progressin the process of restoration after the disaster. As partof the lessons to be learned from the disaster, volcanic
disaster management, including volcano monitoring,
sediment disaster countermeasures, victim management,
and restoration measures, was thoroughly reviewed.
After the eruption had subsided, efforts were made toinvestigate the eruption mechanism by digging into thevolcanic vents at Unzendake and facilities such as the Mt.
Unzen Disaster Memorial Hall, where people can learn
about and experience volcanic disasters, were established.
These efforts resulted in the hosting of the 5th Cities on
Volcanoes Conference in November 2007, approval of
the Unzen Volcanic Area Geopark as a Global Geoparkin August 2009, and the hosting of the 5th International
UNESCO Conference on Geoparks in May 2012.
In this report, I look at the history of volcanic disastermanagement from the perspective of my experience of responding to the volcanic disaster as a Shimabara City employee; I also describe new efforts that have been initiatedin the restoration process and possible future issues.
2. Volcanic Eruption and Specifying of No-entry Zones

The volcanic eruption of Unzendake started on 17
November 1990 and caused a series of sediment andpyroclastic flow disasters beginning in May 1991. The
pyroclastic flows reached some 100 °C in temperature andtheir downward flow speed exceeded 100 km/h, suggestingthat the flows could reach the urban area in 3 to 4 min.
At the time of the eruption it was difficult to provide
accurate volcano information in the form of predictionsof pyroclastic flows. It was also technically impossible
to erect any physical barriers to prevent disaster fromlava collapse. As a result, 43 people died or were listed
as missing in the pyroclastic flow that occurred on 3 June
1991. An urban area densely populated with residential
houses, stores, and factories was specified for the first*time as a “no-entry zone” under Article 63 of the Disaster
Countermeasures Basic Act of Japan to protect lives fromthe pyroclastic flow; no one was permitted to enter thezone without a permit from the authorities. However,prolonged living under evacuation made it difficult forpeople to engage in their agricultural, commercial, or
industrial business activities; they could not go to work or
school, and it was also impossible for them to take care of
their houses or farmland. Establishment of the zone also
made it impossible to maintain the transportation systems
and other infrastructure and to implement such strategies
as sediment disaster countermeasures. The disaster
affected not only the areas directly hit but also the entire
Shimabara Peninsula: commercial and industrial revenue
declined because of a reduction in the numbers of tourists
and shoppers. The population also declined, as many
citizens left the city.
3. Publicizing the Predicted Volcano Disaster Area Map

The (then) Sabo (Erosion and Sediment Control)
Department of the Construction Ministry, together with
the Nagasaki Prefectural Government, explained to
the Shimabara City Government the effectiveness of ahazard map in swiftly enhancing warning and evacuation
systems. At the request of Shimabara City on 1 June 1991,
the Nagasaki Prefectural Government asked the Saboand Landslide Technical Center (STC) to create a hazard
map. A predicted volcanic disaster area map was rapidly
produced. However, the pyroclastic flow that caused somany casualties occurred a little past 4 pm on 3 June, justwhen an STC staff member was waiting to board a planeat Haneda Airport to deliver the map to the city.
On the basis of the assumption that the downward flow
distance of the pyroclastic flow could extend because
the lava dome could collapse, the area upstream from
the Mizunashigawa Bridge along National Route 57 was
specified on 6 June as a no-entry zone under the Disaster
Countermeasures Basic Act. Shimabara City, on the sameday, publicly released the first edition of the predictedvolcanic disaster area map of the Mizunashigawa River,created by the STC. A total of 8 such maps, including thefirst edition, were created as the volcanic activity changed.

Mt. Unzen Disaster Memorial Hall Assistant Director－ 143 －

－ 144 －Legend:Fig. 1 First edition of the predicted volcanic disaster area map (June 1991) [Sabo and Landslide Technical Center] (reduced by 55 % from the original).

Predicted Volcanic Disaster Area Map
Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcanic Disaster Management at Unzendake — S. SUGIMOTOThe Unzendake volcanic disaster made many Japanesepeople aware for the first time of the dangerous pyroclastic
flow phenomenon. The Unzendake disaster made boththe public and administrative officials throughout Japan
keenly aware of the importance of creating volcanic
hazard maps as part of disaster management.
4. Joint Volcano Monitoring and Information Supply by
Self-Defense Forces and University

The Self-Defense Forces (SDF) dispatched for disasterrelief efforts deployed a communications unit at the
Shimabara Earthquake and Volcano Observatory of
Kyushu University to monitor the status of the pyroclastic
flows with an oscillatory wave monitor equipped witha seismometer. It also set up a 24-h monitoring postequipped with field-information-gathering devices suchas ground radar. The initial purpose of such monitoring
activities was to provide logistical support for suchactivities as searching for missing persons or collecting
bodies. Because the volcano observation organizations
lacked functional monitoring devices designed fordisaster management, a warning and monitoring network
was established by using high-tech devices owned byreconnaissance and communications units of the SDF.
However, because its reconnaissance, monitoring, andwarning activities are primarily targeted at military moves
by enemy forces in combat, the SDF lacked volcanologicalknowledge. For this reason, the SDF needed advice
from volcano researchers. The Shimabara Earthquake
and Volcano Observatory of Kyushu University, in turn,required support from the SDF to install and manage
monitoring devices in dangerous areas, because frequentaerial photography of the lava dome and the pyroclastic
flow was indispensable for the observatory’s research
and for giving disaster management advice to local
governments. For these reasons, the volcano monitoring
system was established jointly by the SDF and theuniversity.
The SDF immediately reported by radio real-time
information about the pyroclastic and sediment flows
captured by seismic wave monitors, visual monitoring,and radar observation, and the disaster management
organizations used the data received for their respective
activities. The SDF provided real-time pictures of thecaptured pyroclastic and sediment flows to the disastermanagement organizations. The information was madepublicly available to the public via privately run cable
TV stations, effectively preventing any panic caused byrumors.

5. Coordination Meetings for Specifying No-Entry Zones

Article 63.1 of the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act
stipulates that the head of each municipal government,
who has comprehensive responsibility for disastermanagement in each area of the municipality, has the rightto specify no-entry zones. However, although municipal
heads know the situations and human relationships intheir own municipalities well, they are totally unfamiliar
with volcanic activities. This raises questions about
the wisdom of leaving the responsibility to declare or
nullify no-entry zones to the municipal heads and about
coordination among individual municipalities. The townof Fukae, like the city of Shimabara, specified a no-entry
zone, but it made the zone specification on 8 June 1991,
one day after Shimabara City did so (7 June), because
Fukae sustained no human casualties. Nagasaki Prefecture
sponsored a meeting on 27 June to coordinate no-entry
zone specification before the first specification expired.
The meeting, which was headed by the Nagasaki
governor, was attended by heads of municipalities, firefighting headquarters, police stations, the SDF, the Japan
Coast Guard, and the Kyushu University Observatory.
The attendees decided on a basic guideline based oncomprehensive discussions of the status of the volcano andthe residents. The coordination meeting was not legallybacked by ordinances, but the proposals coordinated anddecided at the meeting were discussed and approved by thedisaster management headquarters of each participatingorganization. The next step to take was for the municipal
heads to specify no-entry zones under the Disaster
Countermeasures Basic Act. Coordination meetings
continue to be held as of December 2011 and have been
joined by new members, including representatives of
the Nagasaki Construction Office of the Construction
Ministry, the Unzen Restoration Work Office, and theUnzen Weather Station.
6. Volcanic Disaster Management and Geopark

Restoration after the volcanic disaster is progressing
steadily on the Shimabara Peninsula, thanks to support
from the central government, the prefecture, and many
people throughout Japan. We are now working on regional
development. However, a decline in disaster awareness astime passes is apparent and is revealing a new issue of theneed to provide disaster education in preparation for the
next disaster. Under such circumstances, three cities on
the Shimabara Peninsula are attempting to revitalize theregion and provide new disaster education programs bypromoting Geopark activities jointly with various groups
and institutions in the region.
A Geopark is a natural park that features the heritage－ 145 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013of the Earth’s activities as a major sightseeing attraction.
The Global Geoparks Network, established in 2004 under
the auspices of UNESCO, promotes Geopark activities
worldwide. Currently five regions— Unzen Volcanic
Area, Toya Caldera and Usuzan, Itoigawa, Sanin Kaigan,
and Muroto—have been approved as global Geoparks inJapan.
Geopark activities are focusing increasingly on disastermanagement efforts. The declaration adopted at the 3rdInternational UNESCO Conference on Geoparks, held
in Osnabrück, Germany, in June 2008, included a phrase
to the effect that “Geoparks help share knowledge about
geological disasters with society.”
Many of the 20 Geoparks approved by the Japanese
Geoparks Network have associations with volcanic
activity, and six of them (Unzen Volcanic Area, Toya
Caldera and Usuzan, Aso, Kirishima, Izuoshima, andBandaisan) are centered around volcanoes. Active
volcanoes in the Japanese archipelago constitute animportant natural heritage, and their eruptions create
additional geological values and benefits, such as
diversity of terrain, vegetation, culture, and society.

Regional volcano education programs can be positively
incorporated into Geopark activities, turning the existing
volcanic disaster management network into infrastructure
to support Geopark activities.
Each volcano has a unique terrain based on differencesin eruption patterns and providing splendid scenic views
and an abundance of local hot springs. The foot of eachvolcano has fertile farmlands with plentiful undergroundspring water, making it possible for residents to make theirliving through tourism and agriculture.
However, although quiescent volcanoes attract many
people with their beauty, they can inflict tremendous
damage on people once they erupt. To coexist withvolcanoes, residents must be fully prepared for swift
evacuation in emergencies such as eruptions, while taking
full advantage of the benefits of the volcanoes when they
are inactive.
The “Volcanic Disaster Management Guideline for
Evacuation after Eruption,” created in March 2008,
includes a provision for “efforts for volcanic disastermanagement by using volcano tourism.” This provision isaligned with the Geopark principle.

Fig. 2 Geo-tour to the relics of the pyroclastic flow disaster.

－ 146 －

Volcanic Disaster Management at Unzendake — S. SUGIMOTO

7. International UNESCO Conference on Geoparks

The 5th International UNESCO Conference on
Geoparks was held in Shimabara from 12 to 15 May 2012,
with about 600 registered participants from a record 31
countries and territories. A total of about 5,300 people—
well exceeding the initial estimate—participated in the
Conference, including the civic forum.
The biennial international conference, which issponsored by the Global Geoparks Network, provides
an opportunity for a broad range of people, including
researchers, administrative officials, Geopark operators,
and the public, who come from various fields such as earthscience, environmental protection, disaster management,
tourism, and the regional economy, to discuss a broad
range of Geopark-related topics. It is never an “academic
conference” on geology and volcanology.
The Shimabara Conference was aimed at sharing andachieving the goal of the Geopark to “achieve sustainableregional development by protecting important earthscientific heritage, using the heritage for education,scientific development, and regional tourism as well as forrevitalizing regional economies.” It was further aimed at
improving the quality of each Geopark by communicatingand exchanging information through the reporting ofactivities by Geoparks of the world.
Many children and students, from kindergartens toelementary, junior high, and senior high schools, whobear the responsibility for the future, played importantroles in making the Shimabara International Conference
an exciting one. The Shimabara Declaration adopted at
the closing ceremony stated that “the experience of theGreat East Japan Earthquake should be utilized effectively
at Geoparks all over the world as an educational tool for
people living in regions under threat from nature.” The
Declaration stressed that “educational programs utilizing
Geoparks, which are the Earth’s heritage, are the mosteffective means of understanding how regional societies
should live together with nature.” The Conference closed
by announcing in summary that “the lively discussions
at the Conference can be used to further develop global
Geoparks and to develop disaster-resilient nations.”
We were able to convey to many participants fromJapan and abroad the attractive features of Shimabara
as a new type of Geopark where people can learn thegeological heritage of the Unzendake, including life withthe volcano, the culture, the disasters, and the benefits.
Volcanoes bring disasters, but when they are inactive
they bring many benefits to people. Geopark activities
put together the disasters and the benefits, as well as thehistory and the culture of the people, to revitalize theseregions. However, Geoparks are not only for tourism
promotion. Japan is located in a mobile belt and its
geology is dynamic. The people of Japan cannot escapefrom natural disasters, but I believe that Geoparks can act
as tools to reduce the damage these disasters can cause.

－ 147 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Practical Example of the Use of a Volcano Hazard Map in 2000 Eruptionof the Usu Volcano– Efforts by the town of Sobetsu for coexistence with ever-changing Earth –Toshiya TANABE*

1. Introduction

On March 31, 2000, at 13:07, a new crater opened near
the national road at the western foot of Usuzan, a volcano
in Hokkaido, Japan, and the mountain started to erupt.
This was its fourth volcanic eruption in the 20th century.
There were no casualties due to a number of factors;
namely, the strong motivation of local residents tolearn lessons from past eruptions and prepare for future
eruptions, the presence of volcanologists who had been
trying to identify Usuzan’s eruption characteristics andthus predict eruptions and develop regional disastermanagement plans, and the launching of educational
programs using an Usuzan Volcano Hazard Map publishedand distributed to all local residents five years before theeruption.

In this report, I describe the first practical case inwhich a hazard map actually helped to mitigate a volcanic
disaster in Japan, in the hope that the lessons from the2000 eruption can assist in disaster management andmitigation in other regions.
2. Historical sketch of Usu Volcano, and Regional Status

Usuzan is relatively a new volcano formed about 20,000
years ago on the southern rim of the Toya Caldera. The
collapse of the volcanic edifice some 7,000 to 8,000 years
ago created countless hummocks around the southernfoot of the mountain down to Funkawan Bay. As of 2000,
nine eruptions had occurred since the mountain resumed
erupting in 1663.

Table 1 General history of Usuzan eruptions.
Year (Era)

Eruption location Pre-eruption tremors

1663
Summit(Kambun 3)
Pre?
Meiwa eruption
1769
Summit(Meiwa 5)1822
Summit(Bunsei 5)

3 days before?
Yes. Time uncertain
3 days before

1853
Kaei 61910(Meiji 43)

Summit10 days before

Northern foot6 days before

1944–1945(Showa 19-20)

Eastern footHalf a year before

1977–1978(Showa 52-53)

Summit32 hours before

2000(Heisei 12)

Western foot4 days before

Major activity/ disaster

Dormant period

Ko-Usu lava dome was created. Houses collapsed andwere burnt down by heavy ash fall. 5 deaths.
Unknown

Thousands ofyears?
40 years?

Houses were burnt down by a pyroclastic surge at the S.E.
foot.
Ogariyama crypt-dome was formed. A village was destroyed and burnt down by pyroclastic surge at the S.W.
103 deaths, many missing.
O-Usu lava dome created, Pyroclastic flow, residents
evacuated
Meiji-Shinzan crypt-dome was formed, Steam explosion,
crustal movement, 1 death (from volcanic mud flow),
ash-fall damage
Showa-Shinzan lava dome was formed. Destruction ofhouses and railways due to crustal movements.
1 death (infant: suffocated by ash fall,
digestive organ ailment), damage from eruption products
Usuzan-Shinzan crypt-dome was formed. Destructionof fertile lands, forests and constructions by pyroclastic
falls, crustal movemens . People were 3 deaths (including
1 missing) from volcanic lahar.
2000 crypt-dome was formed, Destruction of houses androads by crustal movements and volcanic rocks. Lowtemperature pyroclastic flow.

70 years?

* Sobetsu Town Board of Education.

－ 149 －

52 years

31 years
57 years

33 years

32 years

22 yearsTechnical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Photo 1

Left: The Showa-Shinzan Eruption Reenactment
Fireworks Festival.
August 6, 1977 (Saturday) From 20:30
Right: The eruption occurred about half a day
after the festival.
Photo by Saburo Mimatsu at 9:12 on Sunday,
August 7

Photo 2

Before the eruption in 1977, local people tended to shundisaster management discussions because they regarded
such discussions as alarmist. On August 6, the night
before the eruption in 1977, the Sobetsu Town Office,amid volcanic tremors, held the Showa-Shinzan Eruption
Reenactment Fireworks Festival (Showa-Shinzan, literally,“Showa New Mountain,” is a volcanic lava dome adjacent
to Usuzan). Fortunately, at 9:12 the next morning, whenthe eruption began, there were few tourists in the area andthere were no casualties in the initial stages. However,there is no doubt that a disaster could have easily occurred.
The lessons learned from the eruption served as the initial
step in promoting education programs in normal times.
3. Efforts during Normal Periods: Disaster Prevention
Education and Hazard Map

In 1982, immediately after the volcanic activity
that had started in 1977 subsided, the Sobetsu Town
Board of Education, with the cooperation of Hokkaido
University, sponsored the establishment and operation of
the Hokkaido Citizens’ College jointly with the Hokkaido
Prefectural Board of Education.
A social education project, entitled Learning from
Regional Disaster Environments, was inaugurated in
1983. This included a Local History Seminar for Children(sponsored by the Sobetsu Town Board of Education).
Project participants went into the field near active
volcanoes to hear experts’ views and opinions on the giftsof nature and on the disasters.
From 1993 to 1995, a series of events commemorating
the 50th anniversary of the formation of Showa-Shinzan
were held by local volunteers. As part of these events, theSobetsu Town Office, a town with a population of only
3,500, sponsored an International Workshop on Volcanoes

Local History Seminar for Children, heldby Sobetsu Town Board of Education.

Fig. 1 Usuzan Volcano Hazard Map(Date City, Abuta Town, Sobetsu Town, etc.,
published in September 1995)(1995 Volcano Conference). A hazard map was publishedand distributed to all local residents in September 1995.
The Usuzan Volcano Hazard Map is printed on bothsides of an A1 sheet of paper and folded to A4 size. Printed
on the front are the cover, the eruption history, signs of an
eruption, volcano information, and rules of conduct after
an eruption, while the back contains the hazard map andinformation on types of disasters.
In 1998, the Sobetsu Town Office published its own
hazard map, called “Preparation for Disasters,” anddistributed it to all of the town’s residents. It also provided
administrative information, including a series of tips on
volcanic disasters, in the monthly town gazette.
Through these projects including the publication of
hazard maps, the local residents gained an accurate
understanding of Usuzan and bonds of trust were forged
between the experts and government and among local
residents, thus facilitating the evacuation of the residents
before the eruption.

－ 150 －

Practical Example of the Use of a Volcano Hazard Map in 2000 Eruption of the Usu Volcano — T. TANABE

headquarters.
When the emergency volcanic alert (i.e., warning) was
issued at 11:10 on March 29, three local governments, on
the basis of expert advice, rapidly instigated a series ofmeasures, including issuing evacuation orders, providing
evacuation guidance, and installing evacuation shelters.
About 10,000 residents were evacuated before the eruption
without any casualties, thanks to proper explanations andinformation on volcanic activity provided by the experts.

Photo 3

Apartments close to the crater(Photo by Dr. Hiromu Okada).

4.1 Roles of Hazard Map and Evacuation Recommendation/ Order

Fig. 2 Sobetsu Town Hazard Map,“Preparation for Disasters”(Published in March 1998 by Sobetsu Town Office).

Volcanic activity is a phenomenon that occurs
underground and is difficult to predict. The expert
advice and the hazard map, which was created from anaggregation of scientific knowledge, played importantroles in the implementation of a series of evacuation
measures and in providing information to local residents
while the local governments were having difficulty making
administrative decisions.
The evacuation measures were taken in stages andwere based on volcanologists advice and hazard map. The
stages encompassed the period from calling for voluntaryevacuation to recommending and ordering evacuation.
As the first eruption, at 13:07 on March 31, occurred at
the crater at the western foot of the mountain, a decision to
expand the evacuation order zone was made on the basisof the hazard map.

4. Emergency Response of 2000 Eruption of the Usu Volcano

The crater at the western foot of Usuzan started toerupt on March 31, 2000. A group of craters was formed
the following day (April 1) at the northwestern foot of
the mountain. Volcanic activity was observed from thevery beginning of the volcanic tremors on March 27 by
the Japan Meteorological Agency and the Usu Volcano
Observatory of Hokkaido University and was reported
to the relevant local governments. On March 28, each
local government established a disaster management－ 151 －

Photo 4

Volcano expert using the hazard map.

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

4.2 Hazard Evaluation and Flexible Lifting of Evacuation
Order

Experts from the Usu Subcommittee of the Coordinating
Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions andHokkaido University evaluated the hazardous areas andmade decisions regarding brief visits home by residents
and the gradual and flexible lifting of the evacuation order.
It was extremely difficult to predict and depict on the
map the hazard (or safety) levels. This was implemented
by taking into consideration the predicted volcanic
activity, the terrain, the weather, and the wind direction
according to the changes in volcanic activity.
Henceforth, it will be necessary to develop a realtime hazard map that can quickly display the results ofpredictions entered into a computer. It is also necessary toconstruct an information technology-based informationsharing system.

Fig. 4 Usuzan Volcano Hazard Map, 2002 Edition(Date City, Abuta Town, Sobetsu Town, etc., publishedin 2002).
Printed on both sides of A3 paper (left: front, right:back).

4.3 Resumption of Tourism and Development of Safety
Guidelines

5. Development of the Town by Determining Land Use
According to the Hazard Map

The evacuation order zone was gradually changed as
the volcanic activity of Usuzan repeatedly intensified
and subsided. Safety guidelines were developed forthe resumption of tourism, and the Usuzan Volcano
Information Map was published by Sobetsu Town Officein Japanese and English for tourists on May 2000.

The 2000 eruption was very small, but many public
facilities, including the core disaster management base (firestation headquarters), were damaged.
On the basis of the hazard map, the municipal
governments incorporated land use into its reconstructionplans and promoted measures aimed at developing atown in which a potential disaster would be mitigated byrelocating service facilities such as elementary schools andhospitals to safer areas; this had been a major issue sincethe 1977 eruption.
In addition, the municipal governments are developing
a volcanic disaster-resilient social infrastructure. This
includes the establishment of transportation networks andcore disaster-management bases using the hazard map
information as an important decision-making tool.

Fig. 3 “Usuzan Volcano Information Map by Sobetsu
Town”for tourists.
Two versions were created: an A4 map for guest
rooms and a B2 map for building entrances(published in May 2000 by Sobetsu Town Office).

4.4 Revision of Hazard Map

The predictions of the eruptions at the foot of themountain were reviewed on the basis of the experience ofthe 2000 eruption, and in 2002 a revised hazard map was
published and distributed to all residents in the vicinity of
Usuzan. The map is printed on both sides of a sheet of A3
paper. The volume of information provided has been kept
to a minimum. Detailed volcanic information is suppliedin guidebooks published on the same time.

Fig. 5 Land-Use Zone Map (Basic Guidelines for Reconstruction
Planning) March 2001.

－ 152 －

Practical Example of the Use of a Volcano Hazard Map in 2000 Eruption of the Usu Volcano — T. TANABE

6. Conclusion: For Making a Culture of Social Safety

In this report, I mainly describe the usefulness of thehazard map on the basis of my experience, as an official of
local municipality office who has actually used the map to
respond to a disaster. It is also important to understand thatpeople should take actions based on their own proactive
decisions, because true disaster management cannot be
achieved by leaving one’s own safety to others.
The development of human resources througheducation emphasizing an understanding of nature andthe long history of the Earth is the only way to develop asustainable society that can coexist with natural disasters
on the Japanese archipelago, where many types of natural
disaster occur frequently.
Many of the cases in which risks were averted in largescale disasters, including the evacuations before the 2000

Photo 5

Usuzan eruption and the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake,were the result of educational programs implemented
thoroughly and repeatedly and the outcome of efforts
by the academic experts, teachers, and regional leadersinvolved in such programs.
I believe it is important to establish a culture of safety
in which, in addition to the social education field, schools
can provide more systematic and well-prepared disastereducation programs based on the National CurriculumStandards for Schools.
Sobetsu Town Board of Education
287-7 Takinomachi, Sobetsu-cho, Usu -Gun, Hokkaido
052-0101, Japan
Phone: 81 - 142- 66-2131 Facsimile: 81-142- 66-2132
URL: http://www.town.sobetsu.lg.jp/

The Local History Seminar for Children, sponsored by the Sobetsu Town Board of Education, was inaugurated in 1983
to impart accurate knowledge of volcanoes and natural disasters through experience-based learning.

－ 153 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Problems Associated with Activity Assessment, Dissemination of Information,
and Disaster Response During the 2000 Eruption of Miyakejima
Hidefumi WATANABE*

1. Introduction

Volcanic hazard mitigation requires mobilization ofobservational data and volcanological knowledge toachieve accurate assessment of volcanic activity, dissemination of volcanic information, and rapid response. We
saw serious problems in achieving all of these objectives during the explosive eruptions associated with theformation of a caldera and large volumes of volcanic gas
emissions in the Miyakejima 2000 eruption. That year
I was closely involved in volcanic activity assessment
as Chairman of the Izu Subcommittee, Coordinating
Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions. In thispaper, I will detail the challenges and the lessons learned
by working through these steps of activity assessment,
dissemination of information, and response in dealing
with the major activity of Miyakejima that was beyond
reckoning.
2. History of Volcanic Activity on Miyakejima

A volcano erupted on Miyakejima some 2,500 years
ago that formed a caldera at the summit, followed by eruptions from flank and summit craters that spewed out a vast
amount of tephra and ash. However, since 1469 there has
been little evidence of explosive emissions of ash from thesummit crater, although flank fissure eruptions continued
to occur every few decades or so. In recent times, eruptions continue to occur on Miyakejima about every 20
years, including an eruption in 1983, the most recent
eruption prior to 2000. None of these eruptions in recent
centuries have been particularly explosive, and whateverdamage occurred was mostly caused by lava flows.
3. Advance Preparation for the 2000 Eruption
3.1 Detection of Precursors to the Eruption

Repeated leveling measurements in the years sincethe 1983 eruption revealed that, after subsiding during
the 1983 eruption, the southwest part of the Miyakejima
island had continued to uplift. Miyakejima was subjected
to intensive comprehensive observation in 1990, including
the first use of GPS, in order to identify the location of thedeformation source. Systematic re-measurement by intensive observation in 1995 revealed the summit had inflated
significantly, particularly on the south flank, and thesource of the deformation was estimated at a depth of 9.5
km (Mikada, et al., 1996). GPS observations continued,
and an inversion of the GPS and leveling data in 1997-99,
revealed the source of the inflation as estimated to be 2
km southwest of the summit and 9.5 km below the surface(Nishimura, et al., 2002). These results were in line withrelative uplift of the southwestern part of the island foundby leveling measurements after the 1983 eruption, andclearly captured the process of magma accumulation in
the Miyakejima for the first time. We also learned froma network for observing geomagnetic total intensity
covering the island that shallow subsurface temperatures
were rising on the south flank of the summit (Sasai, et al.,2001). While we could have detected these precursors, noone anticipated the 2000 eruption until the sudden intrusion of magma that began on June 26, 2000, accompanied
by a swarm of earthquakes and ground deformation.
3.2 Creating Hazard Maps and Disaster Management

Many of the residents of Miyake Village have experienced eruptions in the past and are thus well aware of
the need for preparedness for volcanic disasters. Basedon areas affected in the past, Miyake Village produced“Miyakejima volcanic hazard map” in 1994 and distributed copies to all the local residents. I would note that the
1994 hazard maps make no mention of the kinds of highrisk phenomena that occur infrequently such as caldera
formation, volcanic bombs reaching to the volcano
foot, heavy ash falls causing mudflows, and large gas
emissions.
The community remembers the disastrous eruption of
October 3, 1983 as Miyake Village Disaster Prevention
Day, when the entire community participates in evacuation exercises and drills. The well-organized evacuation of residents from harmʼs way after the magma
intrusion of June 26, 2000 can largely be attributed tothese drills. After the 1983 eruption, a four-party council
consisting of key local entities with an interest in disaster* Disaster Prevention Division, Bureau of General Affairs, Tokyo Metropolitan Government－ 155 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

prevention—Miyake Village, Miyake Subprefecture,
Miyakejima Weather Station, and Miyakejima Police
Department—was established and continued to meet regularly over the years. Thanks to the four-party council, thecommunication system was well developed, so the initial
response to the eruption in 2000 went smoothly.
4. Activity Assessment and Dissemination of Information
during the Eruption Developments

The Izu Subcommittee of the Coordinating Committee
for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions (CCPVE) met
frequently as the volcanic situation on Miyakejima
unfolded to update our activity assessments based oncomprehensive consideration of observation and survey
results. The Izu Subcommittee met a total of 19 times
between June 26, 2000, the day the Miyakejima came tolife, and October 6, 2000, and the Subcommitteeʼs observation results are published in the form of a Comment
advisories. In the rest of this section, I present an overview and some of the problems associated with the Izu
Subcommittee's assessment of the eruption sequence andinformation dissemination.
4.1

From Seismic Precursors to Magma Intrusion on
West Side of the Island

The initial phase of seismic activity began on June 26,
2000 when we detected, by tracking the hypocenter andground deformation, that magma had migrated from deep
beneath the island up within the south flank of the volcano, and sometime between 10:00 PM that night and the nextday (June 27), magma had migrated to the northwest sideof the mountain. Sea surface discoloration was observed
off the west coast on June 27, which was attributed tosmall eruptions on the seabed. Then there was a prolonged
lull when seismic activity and crustal deformation on
the island tapered off, so on June 29 the Subcommitteeannounced that there was low probability of an eruption
on the island or in coastal waters, and some residents
who had been evacuated from the southern part of theisland began to go home. This seemed like a reasonableassessment at the time considering that, aside from someshallow phenomena directly below the summit that wereapparently related to the collapse of the summit, all signs
pointed to a weakening of seismic activity: seismicity of
the island as a whole had decreased and the north-south
extension associated with contraction in the east and adyke intrusion on west had leveled off.
4.2 Summit Collapse and Large-Scale Phreato / Phreatomagmatic Explosions

Shallow earthquakes, first detected on July 4 below
the summit, had become significantly larger by July 8.
Tremors also gradually increased from around noon, andthat evening there was a small eruption at the summit. The
next day, on July 9, an onsite survey team confirmed thata large pit crater had opened up inside the summit caldera.
It was thought that the pit crater marked an empty cavity
that was left when magma migrated from the summit area
and intruded to the west, a conclusion supported by later
analysis of magnetic and gravity observation data.
The weakening contraction of the island from June 27
to July 7 accelerated just before the collapse on July 8,
then continued at about the same rate until the climactic
eruption on August 18. The massive collapse might haveresumed the magma flow beneath Miyakejima to the west,
but the significance of these events was not fully recognized at the time. Even today, the mechanical causal relationship between the prolonged deflation of Miyakejima
after the collapse of the summit and opening deformationthat occurred between Miyakejima and Kozushima ispoorly understood. A better quantitative understanding of
the mechanical causal relationship between the magma
migration from under Miyakejima to the west and theopening deformation, should contribute to our understanding and ability to predict such phenomena in future at
Miykejima and other volcanoes exhibiting similar events.
Another aspect difficult to understand at the time was
the recurrent phreato and phreatomagmatic explosions
as the collapse of the summit caldera continued. The
continuing volcano contraction and the decreasing gravity
would normally indicate that magma is descending, but inthis case, eruptive activity from the caldera became more
intense, a climactic eruption occurred on August 18, and apyroclastic flow-like phenomena occurred on August 29.
Consequently, we were not able to make public helpful
information that would have certainly supported a rapid
response before the event occurred. This can be attributed
to the fact that eruption prediction (volcanology) research
as well as surveillance systems are still inadequate.
Generally, we assume that magma migrates upwards via
a volcanic conduit or into shallow subsurface and produces
a phreato/phreatomagmatic explosion when the magmacomes into contact with groundwater or seawater. As in
the Izu-Oshima summit eruption in 1986, we suppose thata large-scale phreato or phreatomagmatic explosion rarely
happens when “drain-back” of magma occurs. Yet theexamples of Kilauea (1790, 1924) and Izu-Oshima (5thcentury) show that large-scale phreato/phreatomagmatic
explosions are more likely to occur when linked to a
massive collapse. In the case of Miyakejima, it is thought
the phreatomagmatic explosions resulted from continued
large-scale collapse beneath the summit caldera, which
opened the way for high-temperature material deep below
the summit to come in contact with groundwater. If we had－ 156 －

Problems Associated with Activity Assessment, Dissemination of Information, and Disaster Response During the 2000 Eruption of Miyakejima — H. WATANABE

not only a general understanding of fundamental processesof phreatic explosion but a better understanding of themechanisms and nature of these large-scale events, wemight have been able to recognize in advance the potential
danger of massive phreato and phreatomagmatic explosions as large-scale collapse continued after July 8. On
August 21, the Subcommittee held discussions focusing
exclusively on explosive phenomena accompanying alarge-scale collapse. Another factor preventing a correct
assessment of the eruption of August 18 and subsequent
quick response was that the eruption occurred at night,
and aside from the local weather station, we did not havean observation and research station onsite to quickly
assess the situation. This meant that we could not verify
whether volcanic rock fragments might fall on villages at
the foot of the volcano, with all the potential risk to lifethat entails. Local residents of the island posted valuable
information on the Internet, but we were not able to use
these sources. Considering that volcanologists may not bephysically present at volcano sites (especially in the recent
years when Japan Meteorological Agency and university
observation facilities are being consolidated), we mustput systems in place that will enable us to quickly gather
informations from local people on the scene, and to verify
and assess them.
4.3 Large-Volume Degassing

Ironically, all the observational data collected after
the climactic eruption on August 18, including grounddeformation, gravity, and volcanic gas data, suggested thatmagma had begun to migrate up the summit conduit after
the eruption. Large amounts of volcanic gas discharge
have continued from September 2000 to the present, which
are thought to be maintained by conduit magma convection, but since we have little idea of the source of the gas
supply (depth and size of the magma chamber directly
beneath the island or a magma pool that may exist at evendeeper lower crust), we are unable to predict how long thelarge amount discharge of volcanic gas might continue.
5. Volcanic Information and Disaster Response

Table 1 shows a summary overview of the sequenceof volcanic activities of Miyakejima starting on June
26, 2000, volcano related information, and the disaster
response.
On June 26, a comment from the Izu Subcommittee
advising that “volcanic activity had begun on Miyakejima
and there was a possibility of an eruption” was released by
the Japan Meteorological Agency as an emergency volcano
advisory. Upon receiving this advisory, Miyake Village
and Tokyo Metropolitan Government convened Disaster
Response Headquarters, which immediately beganorganizing disaster response measures. Subsequently,
upon receiving an “activity end” advisory from the
Izu Subcommittee on June 29, Tokyo Metropolitan
Government and Miyake Village disbanded their Disaster
Response Headquarters.
In dealing with the progressive collapse of the caldera
and succession of summit explosions after July 8,
the Miyake Village Disaster Response Headquarters
reconvened to organize repeated evacuations from thedangerous parts of the island in response. However, Tokyo
Metropolitan Government did not reconvene its Disaster
Response Headquarters until after the summit explosions
and low-temperature pyroclastic flow on August 29.
During this period, the dissemination of volcano information and the response both came after volcanic activity had
already begun, but fortunately there were no casualties.
6. Problems with Disseminating Volcano Information andDisaster Response

When Miyakejima erupted in 2000, a number of serious
problems were evident in the assessment of volcanic
activity, the dissemination of information, and the
response. Here we will take a closer look at the three maincauses of these problems.
First, the lack of an onsite observation station except
for the local weather station and insufficient manpower
caused a delay in gathering information, and this madeit impossible to rapidly assess volcanic activities on theisland (this was particularly true for the climactic eruption on August 18). In the recent major eruptions in Japan(Uszan 1977-78, Unzendake 1990-95, Uszan 2000, and soon), the onsite volcano observatories of national universities played major roles in conducting extensive observation and gathering of information. This raises concern thatit may be difficult to grasp rapidly the developments of
volcanic activity associated with future major eruptionsin the Izu Islands or the Ryukyu Islands (Nansei-shoto)where there are no nearby observation-research stations.
Second, the relevant eruption reference scenarios(diagrams showing longitudinal progression of volcanic
events that could occur) needed to accurately assess
volcanic activity based on observational surveys had notbeen created. This was a factor in our inability to predict
the escalation of the eruptive activity accompanying thecollapse of the summit caldera from July 8 to August29, 2000. Scenarios including theoretically possible
events that can be referenced as needed would be especially useful for unexpected styles of eruptions that are
infrequent throughout volcano history but cause severe
disasters.
Third is the structural problem of the system linking－ 157 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

dissemination of volcano information and disaster
response. The Coordinating Committee for Prediction ofVolcanic Eruptions (CCPVE) is a private advisory body of
the Director-General of the Japan Meteorological Agency,
and its specific duties as stipulated in the committee's
operating guidelines are to “make an overall assessmentof volcanic events when eruptions occur, and contributeto disaster prevention by improving the quality of volcano
information.” The primary emphasis of the committee's work so far has focused on assessment of volcanic
activity based on observational data. Most members of
the committee are professional volcanologists, intenselyinterested in volcanoes per se, but not so well trained toprovide information on how best to respond to volcanic
disasters. Especially when we have a succession of unexpected events such as the eruption of Miyakejima in 2000,
volcanologists are keen to focus all their efforts on prediction of volcanic eruptions based on monitoring volcanic
events and understanding of eruption mechanisms, andthis takes a great deal of time. They are less inclined toaddress important issues of disaster response.
While a number of non-volcanologists from disastermanagement organizations and other disaster management
personnel currently sit on the Coordinating Committee
for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions, there is no guaranteeing that they will play their own roles adequately in thecommittee. We should at least provide a certain amountof time to consider the disaster response implicationsof observation data as part of the overall assessment of
volcanic activity toward the end of meetings.
Up to now, important roles in disaster response havebeen held by personnel from local volcano observatories(so-called home doctors) from a sense of personal responsibility, by the local Disaster Response Headquarters
consisting of various disaster management organizations,and various committees of professionals organized by
local governments as required. After the Miyakejima
eruption in 2000, Tokyo Metropolitan Government
and Miyake Village organized a number of committees
to assist with disaster response (Tokyo Metropolitan
Government: the Miyakejima Volcanic Activity ResearchCommittee, September 26, 2000; Investigative Committee
Regarding Miyakejima Volcanic Gas (established in cooperation with the Cabinet Office), September 30, 2002;
Miyake Village: Miyake Village Volcanic Gases Safety
and Countermeasures Research Committee, March 28,
2003; Miyake Village Experts Council for Security andCountermeasures, July 1, 2004).
Also required are people whose primary role is to makedecisions from a disaster response perspective as well asa system for including those opinions. In the future, we
expect to see marked improvement in volcanic activity
assessment capabilities of personnel associated with theMeteorological Agencyʼs Volcano Monitoring Information
Center, as well as mastery of disaster response issues
through experience and exchanges with local government disaster management personnel from communities
located near volcanoes. Accumulation of experiences
and regular exchanges between personnel in the Volcano
Monitoring Information Center (Japan Meteorological
Agency) and personnel in disaster management organizations and local government hold the key to success or
failure of rapid volcanic activity assessment and disaster
response. For this reason, it is extremely important thatthe “Volcano Disaster Management Councils” (consistingof the Japan Meteorological Agency, local government
disaster management personnel, related disaster management organizations, volcanologists, and so on), as detailedin Japanʼs “Basic Plan for Disaster Prevention,” become
firmly established and fulfill their intended capabilities.

－ 158 －

Problems Associated with Activity Assessment, Dissemination of Information, and Disaster Response During the 2000 Eruption of Miyakejima — H. WATANABE

Table 1 Miyakejima eruption sequence in 2000, volcano information dissemination and disaster response.
Date

Phenomena

June 26

Earthquake swarm and grounddeformation began

June 27

Small seabed eruptions west of
MiyakejimaJune 28
June 29

July 4
July 8July 14

Summit explosion

August 10

Summit explosion, volcanic plumes
3 km highSummit explosion, volcanic plumes
14 km highVolcanic bombs reached foot of themountainAugust 21
August 24

August 29

August 31

Disaster response(Tokyo Metropolitan Government andMiyake Village)

High probability of eruption on south Miyakejima
Magma migrated from summit to southwest

Miyake Village convened Disaster Response
Headquarters
Evacuation advisory to south Miyakejima
Probability of eruptions in west sea area and west flank Tokyo Metropolitan Government convenedof volcano
Disaster Response Headquarters
Low probability of eruptions in east Miyakejima
Evacuation advisory to west Miyakejima
Probability of eruptions in sea to the west and on thecoast
Volcanic activity declined, no probability of eruptions Cancel evacuation advisory
Warning of earthquake activity in sea to the west
Tokyo Metropolitan Government and Miyake
Village disbanded Disaster Response Headquarters

Summit seismic tremors began
Summit small eruptions, caldera
Probability that summit small eruptions will continue
Miyake Village convened Disaster Response
collapses
Headquarters (disbanded on the June 29)
Summit explosion, volcanic plumes Summit phreatic explosion, ashfall warning downwind Miyake Village convened Disaster Response
1.5 km highHeadquarters
Evacuation advisory for east Miyakejima

July 15

August 18

Volcano information(Japan Meteorological Agency, CCPVE)

Probability of future summit explosions, ashfall andmudflow warnings
Largest explosion so far

Evacuation advisory for eastern part of Miyakejima
Residents elect to evacuate on their own

Probability of future summit explosions, ashfall andmudflow warnings
Probability of future summit explosions, volcanic
bombs and ashfall warnings
Prediction of eruptions is difficult during this period
Probability of future summit explosions, volcanic
bombs and ashfall warnings

Evacuation advisory for west, north, and eastparts of Miyakejima

Summit explosion, volcanic plumes
8 km highLow-temperature slow pyroclastic
flow to foot of the volcano

Tokyo Metropolitan Government convened
Disaster Response Headquarters
Establish national Major Disaster Management Headquarters
Children and elderly evacuated from theislandProbability of larger eruptions, pyroclastic flows
Volcanic bombs, mudflow and volcanic gas warnings

September
1-3, 2000
End ofBeginning of large amounts ofAugustvolcanic gas emission from summit
October 6
Volume of volcanic gas emissions increased from lateAugustLow probability of explosive eruptions and pyroclastic
flow
Volcanic gas alarms required－ 159 －

Order to evacuate entire island

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Volcano Disaster Mitigation Research Initiatives at National ResearchInstitute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention
Toshikazu TANADA* and Motoo UKAWA**

1. Introduction
Since becoming an independent agency in 2001, theNational Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster
Prevention (NIED) has followed five-year medium-term
research plans in addressing the safety and security ofJapanʼs citizens.
The NIED is pursuing three key research initiatives
with the goal of developing a reliable way to predict
volcanic eruptions and contribute to volcanic disastermitigation: strengthen the nationʼs volcanic observation
network for monitoring volcanic activity, upgrade remotesensing capabilities to track volcanic activity, and develop
simulation techniques to predict volcanic activity andvolcanic hazards.
This report provides an overview of these initiatives
and the progress achieved so far over the past seven years(i.e., during the 2nd five-year research plan (2005-2010)
and the first two years of the 3rd five-year research plan(2011-2016)). For more detailed descriptions of thesedevelopments, please refer to the individual websites of
the NIED researchers that can be accessed here: http://vweb2.geo.bosai.go.jp/intra/member/index.html).
2. Strengthen the Volcanic Observation Network for
Monitoring Volcanic Activity

Fig. 1 Volcano Observation Stations deployed by NIED.

Based on the volcanic eruption prediction plan,
NIED extended the Volcano Observation Network tocover Ioto in the early 1980s; Izu-Oshima in the late1980s; and Miyakejima, Fujisan, and Nasudake in the
1990s. Deployment plans for the volcano observation
research stations were carefully considered by the
Volcano Subcommittee of the Geodesy Division of the
Science and Technology Council in 2008, and basic
observational facilities were built up at volcanoes withhigh research potential by the NIED: volcanoes showing
a high degree of activity, volcanoes that are currently
appear dormant but show signs of explosive activity, andso on. In accordance with this policy, NIED constructedvolcano observation stations at eight sites on a total of
five volcanoes between 2009 and 2010—Asosan, Uszan,

Iwatesan, Asamayama, and Kirishimayama—and one
station at Kusatsu-Shiranesan in 2011. In 2013, NIED willcontinue to observe and monitor a total of 11 volcanoes
including the six just mentioned (Fig. 1).
Fig. 2 illustrates a typical volcano observation station.
As one can see, stations are equipped with short-period
seismographs, tiltmeters, GPS, broadband seismographs,
barometers, and precipitation meters. The combinationof short-period seismograph and tiltmeter is functionallyequivalent to a high sensitivity seismograph with atiltmeter, and successfully picked up precursory signals of
the recent eruptions on Izu-Oshima and Miyakejima. All
these seismic and volcano-related data are continuouslytransmitted back to NIED 24 hours a day by using an IP* National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention** Department of Geosystem Sciences, College of Humanities and Sciences, Nihon University－ 161 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

3. Remote Sensing Capabilities to Track Volcanic Activity

Fig. 2 Schematic of Volcano Observation Station.

virtual private network (IP-VPN) over NTT circuits.
The integrated data are processed continuously 24hours a day for automatic hypocenter detection, automatic
anomaly detection of crustal deformation data, andautomatic modeling on systems developed by NIED. This
processing system performs very well as evidenced by its
success in detecting crustal deformation anomalies andmodeling the Kirishimayama and the Izu-Tobu volcanogroup, and the observational data are periodically reported
to the Japan Meteorological Agencyʼs Volcanic Eruption
Prediction Liaison Council for use in evaluating volcanic
activity. All this observational data—continuous waveform
images, average short-period seismograph amplitudechanges at 1-minute intervals, and tiltmeter change
charts—can be viewed on line at the Visualization System
for Volcanic Activity (VIVA) website (http://vivaweb2.
bosai.go.jp/viva/v_index.html). Moreover, beginning
in January 2013, earthquake and tiltmeter data will beassessable on the Volcanic Observation Network (V-net)site (http://www.vnet.bosai.go.jp/), including a statementof purpose and download instructions. At present inAugust 2012, both of these sites are getting between
2,000-4,000 page visits a day.
The volcano observation data are sent directly to theJapan Meteorological Agency, the agency responsible
for monitoring volcanic activity, over an IP-VPN link inaccordance with an agreement signed on February 1, 2011
to exchange volcano observation data. The data are also
provided to academic volcano research institutes throughthe University of Tokyo Earthquake Research Institute.
In addition, the NIED periodically conducts geochemical
analysis of ground water and thermal water aroundvolcanoes, and measures hydrogen and oxygen isotope
ratios to check for the presence of magmatic water.

The NIED has developed remote sensing technologies
and new analytical methods for monitoring and assessing
volcanic activity. Starting with the development of aremote high-spatial-resolution thermal imaging system
to assess volcanic thermal activity in the 1980s, the 1st
generation VAM-90A, a scanning spectrometer with nine
spectral bands, was completed in 1990, and operated
until 2007. This was followed by a 2nd generation
Airborne Radiative Transfer Spectral Scanner (ARTS)
for volcano observation that was put into service in 2008.
The spatial resolution of ARTS is capable of identifying
features measuring 0.5-to-1 square meter from altitudes
ranging from 700 to 6,500 meters. The ARTS imaging
spectrometer detects light energy (radiance) from visible
to infrared covering wavelengths for up to 421 bands,
which enables ARTS the measure surface temperaturesfrom -20 to 1,200 °C as well as volcanic gas (SO2 gas)
concentrations (Fig. 3). Through 2010, ARTS was used
to successfully measure approximately 50 scenes from
Asamayama and six other active volcanoes. For example,
just after Asamayama eruption on February 2, 2009, wewere able to evaluate the thermal activity, that is, it had
not expanded inside the crater by comparing measured
results before the eruption (November 2008) and after
the eruption (February 21, 2009). ARTS was also used tosuccessfully estimate the surface concentration density of
volcanic gases (sulfur dioxide gas) for three volcanoes:
Sakurajima, Asosan, and Miyakejima.
Another valuable tool is synthetic aperture radar (SAR)
for obtaining high-density crustal deformation data,
which are invaluable for evaluating complex behaviorof magma. This research employs a new time-seriesbased method of analysis called InSAR that combines
SAR images obtained using multiple satellite passes toform interferograms. By reducing noise caused by phasepropagation through the atmosphere and troposphere, very
high resolution maps of crustal deformation were obtained
around the craters of Kirishimayama and Miyakejima
volcanoes (Fig. 3). Radar is also used to monitor andobserve volcanic plumes. Working together with NIEDʼs
Storm, Flood and Landslide Research Unit, we employed
X-band weather radar operated by the Ministry of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) to analyze
the explosive eruption of Sakurajima in 2008 and theeruption of Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) in 2011. We
found that X-band weather radar was fully capable ofobserving explosive eruptions.

－ 162 －

Volcano Prevention Research Initiatives at National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention — T. TANADA and M. UKAWA(Fig. 4). Simulation is a powerful tool for predicting
volcanic hazards. For example, by evaluating mesh-size
dependence of topology data and large-scale lava flows,
we successfully simulated a scenario lava flow from
Sakurajima Showa crater.

Fig. 4 Simulation of the upward flow of magma in conduit.

5. Research Results and Giving Back to Society

Fig. 3 Volcanic observation by remote sensing.

4. Simulations to Predict Volcanic Activity and Hazards

The NIED has made excellent progress in developing
and exploiting simulation methods for assessing volcanic
activity and predicting volcanic hazards. For example,
we performed a simulation using the distinct element
method to model crack growth and magma intrusion in 3D
stress fields caused by magma movement, and were thus
able to evaluate elastic deformation, plastic deformation(breakage), and stress field changes around the magma.
We also developed a method for simulating static stressfield changes near volcanoes caused by plate boundary
earthquakes in a subduction zone, and an approach thatproved very fruitful for evaluating the effects of themagma chamber under Fujisan. Conducting a numericalanalysis of the process of gas-liquid two-phase magma
moving up the volcanic conduit, we were able to analyze
the movement of magma from the magma chamberup the conduit to erupt on the surface by employing
a hydrodynamic numerical model. In other words, bydeveloping this time-development model that replicates
the transition process from a non-explosive eruption toan explosive eruption, we can successfully simulate theprocess of pressure change within the volcanic conduit

Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) erupted on January 26,
2011, and is still active as of October 2012. The Volcano
Observation Network (V-net) stations mentioned earlier
in Section 1 that were deployed on Kirishimayama in2010 based on the policy outlined in 2008 by the Volcano
Subcommittee, Subdivision on Geodesy and Geophysics,
Council for Science and Technology proved very usefulfor capturing the entire process from magma accumulation
to eruption. At the same time, analytical results regarding
occurrence of earthquakes and location and size of magma
chambers that expand as magma accumulates and contract
with eruptions are provided to the Coordinating Committee
for the Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions and are highly
useful for evaluating volcanic activity. The East Shizuoka
earthquake (MJMA 6.4) struck at the foot of Fujisan on
March 15, 2011. When the earthquake occurred, we wereable to infer a fault model from the coseismic crustal
deformation and hypocenter distribution observed by
NIEDʼs tiltmeter and GPS. Using the simulation program
described earlier, we were also able to assess the impact of
the Fujisan magma chamber.
6. Pursuing Domestic and International Collaborative
Research

When drilling boreholes for tiltmeters and otherobservation equipment at Volcano Observation Networksites, the entire length of the geologic core samples
are collected. These samples are extremely useful forinvestigating the past history of volcanic activity at sitesthat cannot be discerned from surface outcrop topography,－ 163 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

and are therefore shared with local universities andresearch labs for further assessment of the geology andpetrology of the volcano.
In terms of international collaboration, NIED shares
its observational data with the World Organization ofVolcano Observatories (WOVO) international database
WOVOdat with the goal of sharing knowledge that
contributes to the prediction of volcanic eruptions. NIED
also collaborates with sister organizations in Indonesia,
the Philippines, and Ecuador in building earthquake andvolcano observation networks, by archiving data andresearch about earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, andpursues collaborative studies with the goal of mitigating
earthquake and volcanic hazards.
7. Outreach Activities

The NIED is committed to disseminating informationthat raises peoplesʼ awareness and helps mitigate volcanic
hazards. Working together with the NIED Disaster
Information Laboratory (DIL) and the Commission on
Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the VolcanologicalSociety of Japan, a compilation of volcanic hazard maps
for Japan was published in 2006. Later, a DVD version of
volcanic hazard map collection was created and widelydistributed to academic groups and workshops throughout
Japan and the world.
The NIED holds an annual Science and Technology
Week Open Institute event every April. In order to promote
greater understanding and interest in volcanoes among
the general public, the event features a video presented by
the Volcano Research Group showing an active volcanic
eruption, an indoor display of cinder, lava, and other formsof volcanic rock, and an outdoor experiment enabling
visitors to experience first-hand what an eruption is like.
The NIED also hosts a number of disaster prevention
educational events for elementary and middle school age
children including Tsukuba Chibikko Hakase (for younger
children) and a Summer Science Camp.
In addition, since 2003 the NIED has cosponsoredan biennial International Workshop with the Yamanashi
Institute of Environmental Sciences that focuses on polices
and measures for mitigating volcanic hazards. As one cantell from the themes covered at the last few workshops—“Learn from attempted eruption events” (2007), “Crisis
management in the event of large-scale eruptions (level4-5)” (2009), and “Real-time assessment and government
response to volcanic disasters” (2011)—the International
Workshop is not just for professional volcanologists fromJapan and elsewhere. Recently a local government official
was invited to speak at the Workshop, and discussion
usually centers on the current state and challenges of
volcanic hazard mitigation.
NIED has also put up a website called Learn more
about volcano hazards! (http://www.bosai.go.jp/
realtime/volcano/detail01.html) for relative beginners
that introduces a wide range of references and resources
organized into three subsections: Books, Instructional
Materials, and Professional websites. Here I would callattention to two pamphlets available in the Instructional
Materials section that are offered in collaboration with theInternational Association of Volcanology and Chemistryof the Earthʼs Interior (IAVCEI) and other organizations:“Health consequences of volcanic ash” and “Prepare forfalling ash.” These two brochures were widely distributed
through local government and mass media channels after
Kirishimayama (Shinmoedake) erupted in 2011, and arefilled with useful and practical advice.
8. Conclusions

This paper has provided a broad overview of the
volcano preparedness and management initiatives andresearch achievements at NIED over these past ten years.
Over the decade, NIED deployed a Volcanic Observation
Network that circulates data based on remote sensing
capability, developed innovative new methods of analysis,
and introduced simulation techniques used to validate
eruption theories. At the same time, the NIED developed
observational techniques that markedly improve ourability to predict and explain volcanic phenomena. NIED
remains committed to mitigate volcanic hazards, andwill continue to gather observational data, develop newtechnologies for tracking and studying volcanic activity,
refine volcanic eruption theory, and develop innovative
simulation models.

－ 164 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Japan’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives: Activities of the Commission on
Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the Volcanological Society of Japan
Yoichi NAKAMURA*, Shigeo ARAMAKI**, and Eisuke FUJITA***

1. Introduction

The Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters
was organized by the Volcanological Society of Japan(VSJ). This commission was set up as a public forum formembers and other stakeholders to exchange ideas andviews on wide-ranging topics relating to the mitigation of
volcanic disasters, to explore possible solutions to various
issues pertaining to volcanic disasters and their mitigation,and to put forward recommendations for the benefit ofsociety. In this paper, we present a broad overview of theobjectives of this commission, highlighting some of theactivities and achievements of the commission to date.
The paper also provides an overview of disaster mitigation
topics that have been taken up for consideration by thecommission.
2. Activities of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic
Disasters

Establishment of the Commission on Mitigation ofVolcanic Disasters was approved at the 2004 General
Meeting of the VSJ. The primary objectives of thiscommission are summarized as follows (Establishment
Proposal, Aramaki, 2004): (1) Assess basic deficiencies
regarding preparedness and mitigation of volcanic
disasters, explore appropriate measures and methods tosolve the shortcomings, and recommend the findings for
implementation. (2) Recommend suitable candidates frompublic and private sectors as disaster mitigation advisors,and promote educational activities by sending theseadvisors out to lecture upon request. (3) The VSJ itself isalso very much involved in developing human resources,
instructional materials, and educational activities with thegoal of educating people and raising awareness regarding
volcanic disaster mitigation.
Adopting the “commission organization” of theInternational Association of Volcanology and Chemistryof the Earth’s Interior (IAVCEI), a number of charges
were appointed—Shigeo Aramaki, Yasuyuki Miyake,
Yoichi Nakamura— to pursue free-reign activities in aneasy-going management style. Three subcommittees were

initially set up: the Strategy Subcommittee managed by
Shigeo Aramaki, the Public Awareness Subcommittee
headed by Yasuyuki Miyake, and the Hazard Maps
Subcommittee directed by Yoichi Nakamura. In 2008,
Eisuke Fujita replaced Yasuyuki Miyake as facilitator.
Then in 2012, Hiroshi Yamasato, Kazutaka Mannen, andKoji Ishimine joined the management team. The VSJ
holds two regular meeting during the year—one in thespring and the other in the fall—and the fall meetings area symposium held on site in a district where there is anactive volcano and are open to the general public.
Table 1 presents a list of the topics addressed by thecommission thus far. As shown on Table 1, the themes on
mitigation of volcanic disasters range widely including (1)systems for monitoring and observing active volcanoes, (2)volcanic warning and alert levels, (3) disaster management
systems in areas with active volcanoes, (4) eruption
scenarios and disaster risk assessment, and (5) large-areadisaster mitigation when large-scale eruptions occur. Other
current topics relating to volcanic disaster mitigation are
also taken up from time to time. The fall meetings are
public symposiums addressing themes related to the active
volcanic areas in which the meetings are held, and theagenda allows as much time as possible for an exchangeof ideas and opinions. Diverse opinions and feedback arereceived from local residents, local government officials,
and members of local disaster management organizations,and the discussions are always animated. Abstracts of therecent public symposiums are put up on the VSJ website.
One major achievement of the commission was to holda symposium on “Volcanic Hazard Map Methodology.”
The 2004 symposium, supported by Earthquake ResearchInstitute, University of Tokyo, offered a good overview
of the process of creating Japan’s volcanic hazard maps
(disaster mitigation maps) that are made available to the
public, and stirred a great deal of discussion. We followed
up the next year by putting out a two-volume edition of“Volcano Hazard Maps of Japan.” The Commission on
Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters then collaborated with the
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster* Utsunomiya University** Yamanashi Institute of Environmental Sciences (YIES)*** National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (NIED)－ 165 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013
Table 1 List of Session Topics of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters: from 2004 to 2012.
Monitoring active volcanoes and the role of volcanic information
Active volcano monitoring/observation and volcanic disaster mitigation: Recent initiatives.
Active volcano monitoring/observation and volcanic warnings: What roles do these have in mitigating volcanic disasters?
How evacuation systems related to volcano management countermeasures should be implemented in the event of an eruption
Implementation of volcanic monitoring, eruption predictions, and warnings by the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)
Evacuation systems with new volcanic warning and volcanic alert levels when eruptions occur
How well do the new volcanic alarm levels and volcanic warnings work?
Action assignments pertaining to volcanic warning and alarm levels
Reviewing Japan's volcanic disaster mitigation strategy
New framework of volcanic disaster mitigation from the standpoint of current eruption prediction levels
Operation and exchange of information among on-site disaster management headquarters when volcanic disasters occur
Review of the "Volcano Disaster Prevention Guidelines for Evacuation when Eruptions Occur" and efforts to upgrade the Volcano
Disaster Management System
Japan's volcanic disaster prevention initiatives and volcanic disaster expert system
Volcanic Eruption Emergency Mitigation Countermeasure Plan of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
Role of the Volcanic Eruption Emergency Mitigation Sabo Plan
What is an effective mitigation system for a large-scale volcanic disaster?
How to implement large-area volcanic disaster mitigation when a large eruption occurs
Super-volcanic eruptions and the mitigation strategy
Volcanic disasters from a historical perspective in Japan
What we have learned from the response of the national government to the Great East Japan Earthquake on preparing for large-scalevolcanic disasters that exceed expectation
Eruption scenario of Izu-Oshima submitted by the Izu-subcommittee, Coordinating Committee for Prediction of Volcanic Eruptions
Recent progress of discussions on Nasudake eruption scenario
Review of Italy's Bayesian Event Tree (BET) for eruption forecasting
Proposal of Volcanic risk assessment for active volcanic areas in Japan
Study of nationwide volcanic disaster threat assessment
Volcanic disaster mitigation initiatives in the construction industry: Introducing the volcanic hazard risk assessment map system
Volcanic disaster mitigation after the Unzendake 1991 eruption
Unzendake conduit boring project: implementation and lessons
Overview of Kirishima (Shinmoedake) eruption in 2011
Sakurajima activity 2006: Response initiatives and residents' awarenessVolcanic gas safety measures at Miyakejima Island
How has volcanic mitigation changed in Hakoneyama through introduction of volcanic alert levels?
Recent volcanic activity and current volcanic mitigation in Asamayama
Simulation exercises and evacuation drills with map assuming Nasudake eruption
Thoughts on lessons learned based on experience and eruption crisis response in Iwatesan
Historical eruption and disaster mitigations in Hokkaido-Komagatake:Lessons from Usuzan eruption in 2000
Lessons from volcanic disaster and mitigations of active volcanoes in Hokkaido
Activities of the Crisis & Environment Management Policy InstituteRebirth of the Aso Volcano Museum
Volcanic observation by Advanced Land Observing Satellite "DAICHI"
Publication of Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan database, DVD edition
Cities on Volcanoes 5, Shimabara 2007
Aircraft and volcanic ashes at the 2010 eruption of Eyjallajokull
Eruptions of Mt. Vesuvius in Italy and the remains
The 1783 eruption of Asamayama and the remains of volcanic disaster

Prevention (NIED) to develop a database system giving
access to high-resolution images of Japan’s volcanic
hazard maps (disaster mitigation maps) along with otherrelevant materials, and has kept the maps and other content

regularly updated. A DVD version came out in 2006
entitled “Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan” that can also beaccessed by the general public on the NIED website.

－ 166 －

Japan’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives: Activities of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the Volcanological Society of Japan — Y. NAKAMURA et al.
3. Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Issues Addressed ThroughCommission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters Topics

In this section we will introduce some of the discussions
relating to topics raised in the Commission on Mitigationof Volcanic Disasters, with additional comments provided
by Yoichi Nakamura, one of the Commission charges.
Topics covered in other papers are not considered here.
3.1 Volcanic Activity and Disasters in Japan

Since volcanic phenomena are caused by the movement
or action of magma, they exhibit a diverse range ofcharacteristics: site locality, precursory signs, diversity
and scale of activity, term or length of activity, periodicityof activity, and so on. Therefore, a historical recordof volcanic activity and volcanic disasters in the pastcan serve as a very useful basic resource for disastermitigation. Studying how best to respond to volcanic
disasters based on these historical materials certainly helps
implement an effective disaster mitigation system.
A summary overview of the history of volcanic activity
and disasters for Japan’s 110 active volcanoes over the
past 2,000 years has been compiled (Nakamura and Ito,2012). A total of 1,160 eruptions over the past 2,000 years(a series of eruptions within a short time frame are treatedas a single event) have been recorded. Of these, it is foundthat the 47 active volcanoes constantly monitored by theJapan Meteorological Agency (JMA) account for close to87% of total eruptive events. Much of the volcanic activity
in Japan involves debris that is explosively ejected into
the air, so the scale of volcanic eruptions can be measured
on the Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI). Fig. 1 shows theamount of volcanic activity for different scales of VEI.
There is a pronounced increase in the number of recorded
VEI 3 and VEI 2 scale events over the past 500 years,
and the number of VEI 1 events over the past 150 years.
Turning to frequency distribution of volcanic events as afunction of eruption scale (Fig. 2), the VEI 3 scale events
are the most common, and in fact this trend is apparent for
active volcanoes the world over for about the past 10,000
years (Siebert et al., 2010). Japan accounts for roughly 15% of recorded VEI 5 to VEI 2 scale eruptions in the world.
Estimating the average frequency of eruptions in Japanfor different scale volcanoes, we find that VEI 5 eruptions
occur about every 200 years, and VEI 4 scale eruptions
take place approximately every 50 years, with little
fluctuation over time. VEI 3 and VEI 2 scale eruptions
occur at intervals of 18 years and 4 years, respectively,
but here we see far greater fluctuations in the intervals
between eruptions.
Examining recorded fatalities from Japan’s volcanic
disasters over the past 2,000 years, we obtain a total of
approximately 20,000 victims (excluding people whodied of starvation in the aftermath of an eruption), withslightly over 80 % of fatalities due to volcanic tsunami
and the next largest toll due to mudslides (lahars) (Fig.
3). Most volcano-related fatalities are attributed topyroclastic fall debris (including cinders), mudslides, andpyroclastic flows, in that order. The number of fatalities
due to pyroclastic fall debris and pyroclastic flows tend
to increase with the scale of the eruption. The number ofcasualties per volcanic incident is highest for volcanic

65Lava flow(0.06%)

VEI

4
3

Unkown
(4.9%)

2

Pyroclastic
fall(26.8%)

1
0
㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻠㻜㻜

㻢㻜㻜

㻤㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻝㻠㻜㻜

㻝㻢㻜㻜

㻝㻤㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㼅㼑㼍㼞㻌㻭㻰

Fig. 1 Scale (VEI) of volcanic activity occurring in Japan overthe past 2,000 years.

㻺㼛㻚㻌㼛㼒㻌㻱㼞㼡㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㼟

No. 㻌of㻌
Eruptions
by VEI

4000

Volcano-related
casualties,
past 2,000 years
in Japan

3000

2000

Pyroclastic
flow(7.5%)

1000

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Japan

56

227

551

113

41

10

0

0

9
0

World

976

1239

3808

1083

412

168

50

6

0

Japan/World

5.7%

18.3%

14.5%

10.4%

10.0%

6.0%

0

0

0

Lahar
(47.4%)

Fig. 2 Scale (VEI) of volcanic activity occurring in Japan overthe past 2,000 years and in the world over the past 10,000
years. Data of volcanic activity in the world are from
Smithsonian Inst. (2010).

Debrisavalanche(13.4%)

Fig. 3 Volcano-related casualties by cause over the past 2,000
years in Japan (excluding deaths due to volcanic tsunami).

－ 167 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

tsunami followed by debris avalanches, but these eventsare extremely infrequent. These trends are consistent withthe breakdown of volcano-related fatalities worldwide
over the past 100 years (Tilling, 1989, and others).
Lahars and debris flows continue to occur for someintervals after an eruption, so it is not surprising that muchdiscussion on the mitigation of lahar disasters at mostpublic symposia in areas of active volcanism tend to focus
on effective measures to counter this type of hazard.
3.2 Volcanic Hazard Maps and Disaster Risk Maps

Japan’s first volcanic hazard map (disaster mitigationmaps) was published for Hokkaido-Komagatake in 1983,
followed by a map created for the Tokachidake Volcanothat was made available in 1987. Following the eruptionof Unzendake in 1991, there was a marked increase inproduction of hazard maps after the Japan Meteorological
Agency (JMA) published “Guidelines for Drafting Hazard
Maps of Areas Threatened by Volcanic Eruptions” in 1992,
and hazard maps were published for most of the highly
active volcanoes classified as Rank A (a ranking system
based on degree of activity defined by the JMA). Then,following the eruption of Miyakejima and Usuzan in 2000,
hazard maps were produced for many areas associatedwith Rank B and some of Rank C active volcanoes(Nakamura et al., 2006). Currently as of 2012, some 160
hazard maps and 110 other relevant references have been
published for a total of 40 volcanoes on the JMA’s list of
110 active volcanoes (Table 2). More recently, an effort
has been made to revise hazard maps and other references
to make them more intuitive and user friendly for local
residents (Local governments in volcanic areas have been
especially active in creating these revised hazard maps).
Volcanic hazard maps are produced by examining thehistory of past volcanic activity and disasters in a region,
assuming what a local disaster would be like based on
climactic and typical volcanic activity for the area (inmost cases based on a deterministic approach), thenproducing a map that anticipates or predicts the result ofa volcanic disaster in the area (Table 2). To ensure themost effective use of hazard maps for a particular area,
the disaster mitigation information must be presented
as clearly as possible. Many of Japan’s active volcano
areas have become tourist destinations, and in some cases
residential areas have encroached close to craters. The
risk (threat) to natural and social environments caused
by volcanic disasters in these areas is evaluated, and theresults are made widely available as basic information to
local communities.
The concept of risk assessment has been appliedin various sectors over the years: application of risk
assessment to oil tanker accidents in the 1970s led toapplication of the concept to financial derivatives in the
1980s, and to catastrophic accidents and natural disasters
since the 1990s. It is proposed that assessing the risk ofnatural disasters involves risk analysis (analysis of risk
factors), risk assessment (assessing potential losses ordamages to an object, an area, etc.), and risk management,ie: processes to mitigate risk (UN/ISDR, 2004; NVEWS,
2006, and others).
It has also been suggested that developing these kindsof risk assessments would have a significant mitigating
effect as a basic volcanic disaster mitigating infrastructure.
Applying this approach to assess potential risk to naturaland social environments posed by a volcanic disasteressentially involves calculating a numerical risk factor,
then performing an assessment based on the risk factor(Tiling, 1989; Blong, 2000, and others). By casting therisk assessment results in the form of a disaster risk map(assumed disaster threat map), it becomes a very easy-touse disaster mitigation resource for communities living inthe shadow of active volcanoes. It is also recommended
that these localized risk assessment results be incorporated
in projects to upgrade disaster mitigation systems withimmediate and medium-to-long-term perspectives.
The Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters
has discussed a wide range of issues—disaster mitigation
responses to volcanic eruptions in the past, how to
implement volcanic mitigation approaches in Japan basedon probabilistic methods developed in other countries—
but so far, risk assessment of volcanic areas has been
seldom tried, and there are no cases of actually testing theeffectiveness of this probabilistic method approach on past
volcanic eruptions in Japan.
3.3 Probabilistic Disaster Mitigation using Eruption
Event Trees and Scenarios

Volcanic warnings and volcanic alert levels wereintroduced by JAM in 2007, and it became necessary
for local governments near volcanoes to formulate
regulations, evacuation plans, and other countermeasurescorresponding to the alert levels. However, until the
volcanic alert levels were introduced, very few local
governments had done anything to reassess their own
regional disaster prevention plans (Nakamura, et al.,2007).
Because volcanic activity exhibits progression andchange over time, coming up with a disaster mitigation
system that can anticipate this progression in advanceis highly effective for mitigating hazards. The current
mitigation systems in Japan based on regional disasterprevention plans that have been put in place so far assume
volcanic factors and scale based on a deterministic
approach, then formulate countermeasures accordingly.

－ 168 －

Japan’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives: Activities of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the Volcanological Society of Japan — Y. NAKAMURA et al.
Table 2 Monitoring and observation system for volcanic areas in Japan, drafting hazard maps, and volcanic disaster mitigation
system based on Local Disaster Management Plans.
No. Volcano nameConstant
Volcanic monitoring
system in
rank
place

Volcanic Year ofhazard map
alarmpublishedsystem

1 Shiretoko-Iozan

B

2007

2 Rausudake

B

2007

3 Atosanupuri

C+

4 Meakandake

B+

Integrated Name of Regional Disaster Mitigation Plans dealing with Volcanicmap
Disasters (Prefetural name), as of 2011
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

2001

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

+

1999

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

5 Taisetsuzan

C+

6 Tokachidake

A

+

+

1986

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

7 Tarumaesan

A

+

+

1994

8 KuttaraC+

9 UsuzanA++

10 Hokkaido-Komagatake

A

+

+

11 EsanB+

12 Iwakisan

B

13 Akita-Yakeyama

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

1995

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

1983

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

2001

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

+

2002

+

Wind and Flooding Countermeasure Volume (Aomori)

B

+

1996

+

Volcano Disaster Countermeasures (Akita)

14 Iwatesan

B

+

+

1998

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Iwate)

15 Akita-Komagatake

B

+

+

2003

+

16 Chokaisan

B

+

2001

+

17 Kurikomayama

B+

18 Zaozan

B+

19 Azumayama

B+

20 Adatarayama

B

21 Bandaisan

B

22 Nasudake

2006

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasure Plan (Hokkaido)

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Akita),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Iwate)
Wind and Flooding Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Yamagata),
General Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Akita)
NoneWind and Flooding Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Miyagi),

2002

+

+

2002

+

General Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Fukushima)

+

+

2002

+

General Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Fukushima)

+

+

2001

+

General Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Fukushima)

B

+

+

2002

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tochigi)

23 Nikko-ShiranesanC+

24 Kusatsu-Shiranesan

B

+

+

1995

25 Asamayama

A

+

+

2001

26 Niigata-Yakeyama

B

+

+

2002

+

27 Yakedake

B

+

+

2002

+

28 NorikuradakeC+

29 Ontakesan

B+

30 HakusanC+

31 Fujisan

B+

Wind and Flooding Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Yamagata)

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tochigi)+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Gunma),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Nagano)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Nagano),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Gunma)
Wind and Flooding Countermeasures Volume (Niigata)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Nagano),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Gunma)䋩
None+

General Countermeasures Plan (Gifu),

2002

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Nagano)
None
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Yamanashi),

+

2001

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Shizuoka),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kanagawa)

32 Hakoneyama

B

+

+

33 Izu-Tobu Volcanoes

B

+

+

34 Izu-Oshima

A

+

+

35 NiijimaB+

36 Kozushima

B+

37 Miyakejima

A

+

2004

+

1994

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Shizuoka),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kanagawa)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Shizuoka)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)

+

1994

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)

38 Hachijojima

C+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)

39 Aogashima

C

40 Ioto41 Tsurumidake and Garandake

B
B

+
+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)
Volcano Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Tokyo)

42 YufudakeC

43 Kujusan

B+

44 AsosanA

45 Unzendake

A

46 Kirishimayama

+

2003

+

2003

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures (Oita)

+

2004

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures (Oita)

+

+

1995

+

General Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kumamoto)

+

+

1991

B

+

+

1996

+

47 Sakurajima

A

+

+

1994

+

Volcano Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)

48 Satsuma-Iojima

A

+

+

1996

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)

49 Kuchinoerabujima

B

+

+

1996

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)

50 Nakanoshima

B

1996

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)

51 Suwanosejima

A

1996

+

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)++－ 169 －

Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures (Oita)

Basic Plan Volume (Nagasaki)
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Miyagi),
Volcanic Disaster Countermeasures Volume (Kagoshima)

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

However, because there are factors not assumed and scales
for which no countermeasures have been considered inadvance, if a disaster of this magnitude actually does
occur, local authorities would find themselves scrambling
to come up with an effective mitigation response—
evacuation plan, countermeasures, and so on—on thescene at the site of the disaster.
In order to promote discussion of disaster mitigation
responses that encompass volcanic phenomena andactivity that progress beyond expectation, responses thatincorporate a probabilistic approach are necessary. Shifts
in activity to be forecast could be small-scale disasterfactors that have a high probability of occurring or largescale or multiple disaster factors with a low probabilityof occurring. We are thus exploring probability event tree
algorithms (e.g. 1996 eruption, Sourfriere Hills) that can
predict various types and scales of volcanic phenomena
over time that are associated with progressions or shifts
in volcanic activity. Improving the predictive accuracy of
event tree algorithms requires estimates of the probabilityof events occurring (numerical estimates and ranking),
and creation of a probabilistic event tree. Examining thekinds of monitoring and observational data needed for thevarious end branches of probability tree algorithms forforecasting would also be a useful exercise. If we could
develop event trees along these lines, we could derive
high-probability activity progressions as well as typicalprogressions, explore disaster response measures required
over time, and create realistic eruption scenarios. By
pursuing a disaster mitigation response that incorporates
this kind of probabilistic approach, we could reduce
volcanic phenomena that until now have been beyond thescope of assumptions, put in place mitigation responses
that are tailored for a wide range of disaster factors
and scales, and implement real-time disaster mitigation
systems that are highly effective in their mitigating effects(Nakamura, 2009).
The Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters
has addressed how mitigation plans and systems shouldbe implemented with the introduction of volcanic warningand volcanic alert levels, how to develop volcanic
event trees and scenarios, disaster mitigation based on
probabilistic event trees that have been introduced in othercountries, and a range of other topics. So far, however,probabilistic real-time disaster mitigation systems havenot been sufficiently deployed in Japan.
3.4 Large-Area Disaster Mitigation Systems for LargeScale Eruptions

The 1961 Disasters Countermeasures Basic Act directs
that prefectural and municipal governments draft local
disaster management plans that cover disaster preparedness

and proactive countermeasures, disaster emergency
response, and disaster recovery and reconstruction
countermeasures. Then, these plans are to be madewidely available to local communities. For dealing
with natural disasters, the local plans contain separate
volumes for earthquake countermeasures, wind and flood
countermeasures, volcanic disaster countermeasures,and snow damage countermeasures. The 1973 Act on
Special Measures for Active Volcanoes (Active VolcanoAct) stipulates that if an active volcano erupts, prefecturaland municipal authorities shall establish local Disaster
Management Headquarters to carry out emergency
response measures based on the regional disasterprevention plans. If necessary—say, if a catastrophic
disaster occurs—the Cabinet Office of the national
government shall establish Major Disaster Management
Headquarters and Headquarters for Emergency Disaster
Control to orchestrate a comprehensive emergency
response.
Current compliance of Japan’s local governments indeveloping regional disaster prevention plans for volcanic
disasters is shown in Table 2. One can see that, while
many of the 26 prefectures with active volcanoes havedrafted general disaster countermeasure volumes andwind and flood countermeasure volumes, remarkably few
have drafted volcanic disaster countermeasure volumes(Nakamura et al., 2007; and others). Examining the
volcanic disaster-related content, we find that much is
written about disaster preparedness, but little is written
about post-evacuation recovery and reconstruction,and content about post-evacuation support measures
is inadequate. Local governments that have actuallyexperienced a volcanic disaster focus attention of volcanic
disaster-related discussion, but most have not drafted
specific procedures for volcanic disasters and seem tothink that the general disaster countermeasure volume
is adequate. We would also note that most prefecturesand local governments have drafted earthquake
countermeasure volumes as part of their regional disasterprevention plans.
As we observed earlier, large-scale volcanic uprest(VEI 4 and VEI 5) of Japan’s active volcanoes occurs withsome probabilistic regularity. These larger scale eventscommonly involve multiple secondary factors, and history
shows that they often extend over a large area and persist
over long periods. Looking back further into the geologicalrecord, there is plenty of evidence that VEI 6 and above
super-volcanoes and catastrophic eruptions have occurredin Japan.
Many of Japanʼs active volcanoes straddle
administrative borders, so there are many cases where－ 170 －

Japan’s Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Initiatives: Activities of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters, the Volcanological Society of Japan — Y. NAKAMURA et al.

multiple administrative units fall victim to the same
disaster factor even though the eruption may be small inscale. When local governments and disaster mitigation
organizations are inevitably slow to join forces andcooperate, this results in volcanic disasters being counted
more even for relatively small scale disaster factors.
Since local governments bear responsibility for dealing
with local disasters, several local governments may draft
their own regional disaster prevention plans and consider
disaster mitigation systems in response to one target
volcano. Because of this redundancy, there are actuallysome districts in which prefectures or local authorities
give out hazard maps that are not integrated or unified
even though they cover the same volcano. But whenlarge-area volcanic disasters occur that involve multiple
administrative units, if all the local governments attempt
to implement their own disaster mitigation systems, theirefforts tend to fall short. This led to the recommendation
to establish Volcanic Disaster Mitigation Councils that
could mount a more effective response to large-area
volcanic disasters by bringing all the local governments
together that are affected by volcanic uprest from thetarget volcano. Yet there are still many districts withactive volcanoes where Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Councils have not been set up. In fact, the district aroundFujisan is the only example so far of several prefectures
coming together to form a Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Council in the country. Other districts should certainly
consider drafting a large-area disaster management planthat encompasses the local disaster plans of multiple
administrative units in order to respond more effectively
to large-area disasters, and deploying large-area disastermitigation systems in which the prefecture or even thenational government assumes responsibility (i.e., theresponsible entity behind the Volcanic Disaster Mitigation
Councils).
Serious discussions have been held among constituent
members of the Commission on Mitigation of Volcanic
Disasters—local residents, local governments and disasterprevention stakeholders, the media, volcanologists anddisaster professionals—regarding the need for largearea disaster mitigation that encompasses multiple
administrative districts and/or multiple disaster factors,
and how large-area disaster mitigation should be
implemented. In addition to exploring how several local
governments can work together to achieve a close-knit
disaster mitigation system, members of the Commission
on Mitigation and Volcanic Disasters exchange views andprovide feedback on radical reform of disaster mitigation
systems that goes far beyond the existing localized disastermitigation systems.

4. Conclusions

The Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 taught us thevaluable lesson that we cannot ignore the possibility oflarge-scale volcanic disasters simply because they happen
infrequently and are beyond the scope of our assumptions.
Rather, we must continue to discuss and explore not
only the more tangible “hardware” elements of disaster
response, but also the less tangible “software” aspect of
response such as raising disaster mitigation awareness,promoting disaster mitigation education, conducting
evacuation training and drills, maintaining accurate
disaster information, making the reliable informationassessable to the public, and so on. Volcanic disastermitigation in the past generally focused on the volcanic
activity or history of disasters that occurred over the
past 2,000 or 10,000 years. The problem is that largescale disaster factors that occur infrequently are often
excluded from discussion because they exceed the realmof “hardware” response in terms of cost-effectiveness, andas a result, “software” responses also tend to be excluded
from discussion.
In order to establish a more robust disaster mitigation
system for dealing with volcanic disasters, a new volcanic
disaster mitigation framework is called for, and theCommission on Mitigation of Volcanic Disasters of the
Volcanological Society of Japan provides the ideal forum
for vigorous discussion among the many stakeholders as
to what this new framework should look like.
Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges Yayoi Hotta(Disaster Information Laboratory of the National ResearchInstitute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention)
for assembling and organizing data used in this paper
regarding Japan’s volcanic hazard maps and Regional
Disaster Prevention Plans.
References－ 171 －

1) Blong, R. (2000): Volcanic Hazards and Risk
Management, Encyclopedia of Volcanoes (Ballard,
D.R. ed.), 1215-1227. Encyclopedia of Volcanoes(Sigurdsson et al., Ed.), Academic Press. 1417 pp.
2) Ewert, J.W., M. Guffanti, and T.W. Murray (2005):“An assessment of volcanic threat and monitoring
capabilities in the United States: Framework for a
National Volcano Early Warning System NVEWS.”USGS Open-file report 2005-1164.
3) Nakamura, Y., Aramaki, S., Sato, T., Hotta, Y., andUkawa, M.（2006）: “Volcanic Hazard Maps ofJapan,” Tech. Notes of the National Research Institutefor Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 292,

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

1-20 (available on 2 DVDs).
4) Nakamura, Y., Fukushima, K., Jin, X., Ukawa, M.,
Sato, T., and Hotta, Y. (2007): Mitigation Systems by
Hazard Maps, Mitigation Plans, and Risk Analyses
Regarding Volcanic Disasters in Japan. J. Disaster
Research, 3-4, 297-304.
5) National Research Institute for Earth Science andDisaster Prevention, Japan (2007)： Volcanic Hazard
Maps of Japan with additional DVD3. Reference－ 172 －

Material to the NIED Technical Note, 292，National
Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster
Prevention, 1-7.
6) Siebert, L., T. Simkin, and P. Kimberly (2010)：
Volcanoes of the World, 3rd Ed. Smithsonian Inst.,
Univ. of California Press. 551pp.
7) Tilling, T. I. (1989)：“Volcanic hazards and their
mitigation: Progress and problems,” Rev. Geophys.
27-2, 237-269.

● Explanation of“Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan – Second Edition”● List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material● Location Map on Volcanoes

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Explanation of “Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan – Second Edition”
Yayoi HOTTA*, Hinako SUZUKI *, Katsue SAWAI *, and Toshikazu TANADA*

1. Outline

This database, “Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan,”covers almost all hazard maps and disaster prevention
maps published from 1983 to March 2013 for 40 active
volcanoes in Japan. It also includes the old versions of themaps and explanatory references.
The enclosed DVD contains 319 reference materials, including those covered by the first edition, which
was published in 2006, and those collected thereafter.
The DVD also contains 56 hazard maps plus 27 related
reference materials for which approval has been newly
obtained from the institutions and committees that prepared them, and it contains regional disaster prevention
plans and volcanic disaster prevention plans for whichusage permission has been obtained. Y. Hotta controlled
the entire process of preparing the references and edited
illustrations and papers. K. Sawai collected the maps andreferences and prepared the “List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material”, and H. Suzuki
supervised the creation of the html files and web pages.
2. How to Use the DVD-ROM

The English opening screen automatically opens thefile “index_eng.html” from the disk. There are two searchportals on the English opening screen, from which users
can choose:a) “Search from a list of Volcanic Hazard Maps”b) “Search by Volcano Location Map”
For Google Earth, we have experimented with providing location information on active volcanoes in Japanby using a KML (Keyhole Markup Language) Network
Link. In every case, the user finally arrives at the “List of
Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material.”
A digital image file for screen browsing can be opened
by selecting and clicking on a hazard map or a referencematerial from the list in the “Name of hazard map / Reference material” column. The resolution of data files forprinting is about 300–400 dpi. Some maps and references
have no separate data files for printing, either because
they were not available or because we needed to save on
disk capacity.

On the opening screen there are also links to regional
disaster prevention plans and volcanic disaster prevention
plans.
3. “List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material”

The methods used to organize the maps and referencematerials and the definitions of the terms in the “Nameof hazard map / Reference material” list are described below.
3.1 Organization of Maps and Reference Materials(1) Hazard maps and reference materials
In the database, published hazard maps and disasterprevention maps, regardless of their form (e.g. maps orbooklets) are collectively called hazard maps (HMs). Explanatory and related materials and trial HMs are collectively called reference materials (RMs).
(2) Whole and regional editions
Because most volcanoes (except e.g. those on small islands) extend across municipal borders, volcanic HMs areoften prepared by two or more municipalities and relevant
institutions through mutual collaboration. Therefore,
there are various kinds of volcanic HM, even for a single
volcano. In this database, HMs and RMs are classified
into whole and regional editions.
The whole editions aim at the residents in all municipalities subject to hazards posed by the volcano, whereas
the regional editions aim at some municipalities. For example, HMs and RMs that provide information on evacuation centers, publishers, and emergency points of contact
mainly in a single municipality are classified as regional
editions, even though the hazardous area may be relevant
to all municipalities.
(3) Versions
Some HMs and RMs have the same titles and formats
but differ slightly in content. In this database, such HMs
and RMs are regarded as:a) separate HMs or RMs when they differ in content
such as year of publication, contact address, and authorization number from the Geospatial Information
Authority of Japan—regardless of the version numbers, which may be identical* National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention－ 173 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013b) the same HM or RM when they differ in terms of
only the year of issue, not the contents, and the publication year of the first edition is cited in second andsubsequent editions as the original year of issuec) In the case of HMs or RMs reprinted because of amisprint, only the correct version is included in the
database(4) Naming of files
The files have been named in the following manner:
Example: \05atosa_1h01-H.pdf[Volcano ID + name of the volcano]_[1: whole; 2: regional][h: hazard map; m: reference material][two-digit
serial number] -[L: low resolution, H: high resolution]
3.2 Order in which HMs and RMs are Arranged(1) In the “Name of hazard map / Reference material”
list, HMs and RMs are arranged in order of volcano
number. The volcano numbers and names in the list
are based on the “National Catalogue of the Active
Volcanoes in Japan, 4th Edition” (Japan Meteorological Agency, 2012). The rank of volcanic activity isbased on the “National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes in Japan, 3rd Edition” (Japan Meteorological
Agency, 2005).
(2) For each volcano, HMs and RMs are arranged in order from the whole to the regional editions. In eachclass of information, HMs are listed first and thenRMs.
(3) RMs and HMs of the same edition type are each arranged in the reverse chronological order in which
they were published.
(4) If there are two or more regional editions for a single
region, the HMs and RMs are arranged in the orderof the relevant publisher, i.e. from national, throughprefectural, to municipal governments. HMs andRMs published by different municipal governments
are placed in random order.
(5) Reference numbers were newly assigned for thissecond edition of the database and are different fromthose in the first edition.
3.3 Explanation of Columns(1) Common: Description in parentheses indicates information not shown in the original text but added in
the second edition for clarification.
(2) Regions: Japan is divided into four blocks: Hokkaido, Tohoku, Kanto and Chubu, and Kyushu. Volcanic hazard maps have not been prepared for otherregions.
(3) Volcano number and name of volcano: Based on
the “National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes inJapan, 4th Edition” (Japan Meteorological Agency,
2012)(4) Rank (Rank of volcanic activity): Based on the “National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes in Japan,
3rd Edition” (Japan Meteorological Agency, 2005)(5) Name of hazard map/Reference material: The file
you wish to browse will open when you click on thename of the HM or RM.
(6) Pagination: Information on pagination for reassembling separately scanned image sections (if any) into
an entire image is displayed below the name of the
HM or RM. Please see “Notes for printing,” which
can be reached via a link on the opening screen, formethods of image reassembly.
(7) Size and/or kind of reference material: Indicates theoriginal size and/or form of the reference material.
(8) Kind of materials: Expressed as a combination of anumber and a letter, i.e. 1: entire edition or 2: regional edition + h: hazard map or m: reference material.
(9) File size for print: Represents the size of the file inMb, with resolutions of 300–400 dpi. The file size isprefixed with a ▼ mark if the file includes images
at resolutions below 300 dpi. Files for which resolution is unidentified are marked with , showing thatprinting quality is not guaranteed.
(10) Publisher/reference: If the publisher or reference has
their own website, click on the publisher/reference
column to access the website.
(11) Date of publication: The notation of the date of the
publication has been standardized by using the Western calendar. If the date of publication is not written
on the HM or RM, “not written” is shown in thecolumn and any additional information or materials
obtained from the publishers by our clerical staff isadded in parentheses.
(12) Explanation of volcanic alert levels: A link is provided to a leaflet on volcanic alert levels on the websiteof the Japan Meteorological Agency.
4. Regional Disaster Prevention Plans

The database covers the regional disaster prevention
plans cited by municipal governments as of December
2012. Many municipal governments revise their regional
disaster prevention plans annually and make frequentchanges to them. In principle, links are posted to the disaster prevention plan pages of those municipalities thathave such plans posted on their websites. In the case of
those municipalities that do not have plans on the web
but have given us their plans and permission to use them,
the plans are included in the database as PDF files. ThesePDF plans are not the latest versions, and users should－ 174 －

Explanation of “Volcanic Hazard Maps of Japan – Second Edition” — Y. HOTTA et al.

ask the relevant municipality for the latest version every
time they want to use it. In the case of plans that we did
not obtain permission to use, only the names are listed in
the database.
5. Volcanic Disaster Prevention Plans, Emergency Sabo
Plans for Mitigating Volcanic Eruption Disasters, etc.

Volcanic disaster prevention plans, emergency saboplans for mitigating volcanic eruption disasters, and otherrelevant plans as of December 2012 have been collected
and included in the database. In the case of those plansthat we were unable to get permission to use, only theplan names are listed.
Acknowledgments

We thank the municipal governments and institutions
involved in volcanic disaster prevention for helping us tocollect volcanic HMs, RMs, regional disaster prevention
plans, and information on Volcano Disaster Management
Councils. We are also grateful to Ms. N. Hiyama of the
National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention for her help in editing papers.

－ 175 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material
No.

Rank

Name of Volcano

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

A4-book,Attached
A2-B map2h2011.42h2007.4

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

Hokkaido
1, 2

B, B

Shiretoko-Iozan,
Rausudake

1, 2,
3

B, B,
í

Shiretoko-Iozan,
Rausudake,
Tenchozan

5C

Atosanupuri

7

10

B

A

Meakandake

Tokachidake1

HM㻌 01-02sire-rau_2h02

2HM㻌 01-02sire-rau_2h01

3RM㻌
01-02-03-sire-rau-ten_2m01

A4-book2m

2012.6

Rausu

Shari

4

HM㻌 05atosa_1h01

A2-B

1h

2001.12

Teshikaga

5

HM㻌 07meakan_1h01

A4-book

1h2012.8

Kushiro6

HM㻌 07meakan_1h02

A4-book

1h2012.8

Kushiro7

HM㻌 07meakan_1h03

A4-book

1h2012.8Ashoro8HM㻌 07meakan_2h03

A4-book

2h2012.3Ashoro9HM㻌 07meakan_2h02

A2-B

2h

2000.1

Ashoro10

HM㻌 07meakan_2h01

A1-S

2h

1999.8

Kushiro11

RM㻌 07meakan_2m01[in Japanese and English]

A3-S

2m

2000.9Kushiro12

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m08

A4-book

1m2009.3

13

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m07

A4-book

1m2009.3Asahikawa development andconstruction dept. Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

14

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m06

A4-B,
four-page
spread1m

2012.2

15

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m05

A4-book

1m

2003

16

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m04

A4-book

1m

2002.1

17

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m03

A4-B,
four-page
spread1m

2000.318

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m02[A4-book]

1m

1998

19

RM㻌 10tokachi_1m01[A4-book]

1m[1993.5][Kamihurano]

20

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h08

A1-S

2h

2010.3Biei

21HM㻌 10tokachi_2h02

A1-S

2h

[2002]Biei

22

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h01

B2-S

2h

1987

Biei

23

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h04

B2-S

2h

2006

Kamihurano

24

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h03

B2-S

2h

2001.3

Kamihurano

25

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h05

B2-S

2h

1999.6

Kamihurano

26

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h07

B2-S

2h

1992.12

Kamihurano

27

HM㻌 10tokachi_2h06

B2-S

2h

[1986.5]

Kamihurano

Asahikawa Local MeteorologicalObservatory

Asahikawa District Public WorksManagement Office, Hokkaido
Goverment Kamikawa General
Subprefectural Bureau[Legend](1) No. [Volcano number] and name of volcano: Based on the“National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes in Japan, 4th Edition”(Japan Meteorological
Agency, 2012).
(2) Rank [Rank of volcanic activity]: Based on the“National Catalogue of the Active Volcanoes in Japan, 3rd Edition”(Japan Meteorological Agency,2005), but currently unused in JMA.
(3) Name of hazard map/ reference material: The file you wish to browse will open when you click on the name of the HM or RM.
(4) Size [Size and/or form of materials]: Indicates the original size and/or form of the material.“S”is Single side print,“B”is Double sides print.
(5) Kind [Kind of materials]: Expressed as a combination of a number and a letter, i.e. 1: entire edition or 2: regional edition + h: hazard map or m:reference material. The whole editions aim at the residents in all municipalities subject to hazards posed by the volcano, whereas the regional editions
aim at some municipalities.
(6) Others: Please note that these maps and materials are not always the latest.

－ 176 －

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material

No.

12

Rank

A

Name of Volcano

Tarumaesan

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

1h

2003.81h

2003.81h

2006.428

HM㻌 12taru_link_01

29

HM㻌 12taru_1h02[in English]

A4-B,
four-page
spread30

HM㻌 12taru_link_02 *1

Web only

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]
Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT*1: These two hazard maps are made by Adobe Flash. If you can not open these files, please install Adobe Flash Player.

12

A

31

HM㻌 12taru_1h01

A1-B

1h

1994.332

RM㻌 12taru_link_03

Web only

1m

2006.433

RM㻌 12taru_1m04

A4-book

1m[2003]

34

RM㻌 12taru_1m03

A4-book

1m[2003]

Hokkaido,Tomakomai,
Chitose, Eniwa, shiraoi
Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

35

RM㻌 12taru_1m02

A4-book

1m2009.4[Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT]

36

RM㻌 12taru_1m01

A4-book

1m

2008.8

Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

37

HM㻌 12taru_1m06

A4-book

1m

2007.11[Muroran Development andConstruction Dept.], Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

38

HM㻌 12taru_1m05

A4-B,
four-page
spread1m

2007.1

Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

39

HM㻌 12taru_2h04

A4-book2h2005.8

Chitose40

HM㻌 12taru_2h03[A4-book]

2h

2001.5

Chitose41

HM㻌 12taru_2h02 *2

A4-book

2h[1999.4*2]

Eniwa

42

HM㻌 12taru_2h05 *2

A4-book

2h[1999.4*2]

Eniwa

Tarumaesan*2: These two materials seem the same, but the information was slightly modified. We treat them as another edition by our database classification.
12

A

Tarumaesan

14

C

kuttara15

A

43

HM㻌 12taru_2h01

A4-book

2h[1998.4]

Tomakomai

44HM㻌 14kuttara_2h01

A4-book2h2006.12

Noboribetsu

45

HM㻌 15usu_1h02

A3-B

1h

2002.2

Date, Soubetsu, Toyoura, Toyako

46

HM㻌 15usu_1h01

A1-B

1h

1995.9Date, Soubetsu, Toyoura, Toyako

47

RM㻌 15usu_list_only_01

CD-ROM

1m

2000

48

RM㻌 15usu_1m04

A4-book1m

2004.3

Muroran Development andConstruction Dept., Hokkaido
Regional Development Bureau,
MLIT

49

RM㻌 15usu_1m05

A4-book

1m[First Ed.
2003.3]50

RM㻌 15usu_1m06

CD-ROM1m

2005.351

RM㻌 15usu_1m07

CD-ROM1m

2005.352

RM㻌 15usu_1m03

A4-book

1m

2003.3Date, Soubetsu, Toyoura,Toyako

53

RM㻌 15usu_1m02

A4-book

1m

2001.3

Muroran District Public WorksManagement Office, Hokkaido
Goverment Iburi General
Subprefectural Bureau
Corporation䠗Mimatsu Saburo[Mimatsu Masao Volcano
Memorial Museum]54

RM㻌 15usu_1m01

A4-book1m

1997

Mimatsu Masao Volcano
Memorial Museum

55

HM㻌 15usu_2h03

A4-book2h2010.1

Toyako56

HM㻌 15usu_2h02

B3-B

2h

1999.3

Soubetsu

57

HM㻌 15usu_2h01

B3-B

2h

[1998]

Soubetsu

58

RM㻌 15usu_2m05

A4-book2m

2002.5.29

Soubetsu

Usuzan－ 177 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

No.

15

18

Rank

A

A

Name of Volcano

Data
No.

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

59

RM㻌 15usu_2m01

A4-S

2m

2000.5

Soubetsu

60

RM㻌 15usu_2m02[in English]

A3-S

2m

2000.5

Soubetsu

61

RM㻌 15usu_2m03[in English, Chinese, Korean][A4-S]

2m

2000.5

Soubetsu

UsuzanHokkaidoKomagatake

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

62

RM㻌 15usu_2m04

A2-S

2m

1999.2

Toyako-onsen Elementary School63

HM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1h05

A4-book

1h2010.3Mori

64

HM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1h04

A0-B

1h

[2000.3]

Mori

65

HM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1h03

A1-B

1h

1998.8Mori

66

HM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1h02

B2-B

1h

[1992]Mori

67

HM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1h01

B2-S,
2 sheets

1h[1983.11]

Mori

68

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m12

A3-S

1m

[2005.9.22]

Mori

69

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m11

CD-ROM *3

1m

2005.3Mori*3: This reference material is not in PDF but quotes the contents of CD-ROM, just as they are, by the consent of the publisher.

18

19

A

B

HokkaidoKomagatake

Esan

70

RM㻌
18hokkai-koma_list_only_01

CD-ROM1m

2005.1.31

Mori

71

RM㻌
18hokkai-koma_list_only_02

CD-ROM1m

2004.6

Mori

72

RM㻌
18hokkai-koma_list_only_03

CD-ROM

1m

2004

Mori

73

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m10

A4-book

1m

2002.3

Mori

74

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m09

A4-B

1m

[2001.3.30]

Mori

75

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m08

A3-B

1m

[1998.10.1]

Mori

76

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m07

A4-book

1m[1998.8]

Mori

77

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m06

A4-book

1m[1997]Mori

78

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m05

A4-book

1m[1995.3]

Mori

79

RM㻌
18hokkai-koma_list_only_04

VHS

1m

1995

Mori

80

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m04

A4-book

1m[1990.9]

Mori

81

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m03

A4-book

1m

1989.1

Mori

82

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m02

A3-S

1m

[1986.9]

Mori

83

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_1m01

A2-S

1m

[1984.11]

Mori

84

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_2m04

A4-B,
three-page
spread2m[1999.1]

Shikabe85

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_2m03

A4-book

2m[1996.7]

Shikabe86

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_2m02

A4-B

2m

1998

Mori

87

RM㻌 18hokkai-koma_2m01

A3-S

2m

1996

Mori

88

HM㻌 19esan_1h01

A3-S

1h

2001.2

Hakodate

89

RM㻌 19esan_1m01

A4-book

1m

2001.2

Hakodate

Tohoku22
25

B
B

IwakisanAkita-Yakeyama90

HM㻌 22iwaki_1h01

A1-B

1h

2002.2

Aomori91

HM㻌 25akita-yake_1h02

A1-B

1h

2002.1

92

HM㻌 25akita-yake_1h01

A1-B

1h

[ 1996]

Akita, Kazuno Public Works of
Akita Pref.

－ 178 －

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material

No.

27

28

29

Rank

B

B

B

Name of Volcano

IwatesanAkitaKomagatake

Chokaisan

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]
Iwate Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT

93

HM㻌 27iwate_link_01

Web only

1h[2006.2.24]

94

HM㻌 27iwate_1h01

A1-S

1h

1998.1

95

HM㻌 27iwate_1h02[in English]

A1-S

1h

1998.1

96

HM㻌 27iwate_1h03[in Chinese]

A1-S

1h

1998.1

97

RM㻌 27iwate_1m04

A4-book

1m

2005.598

RM㻌 27iwate_1m01[A4-book]

1m

1998.1

99

RM㻌 27iwate_1m02[in English][A4-book]

1m

1998.1

100

RM㻌 27iwate_1m03[in Chinese][A4-book]

1m

1998.1

101

HM㻌 27iwate_2h04

A0-S

2h

2000.3Morioka102

HM㻌 27iwate_2h02

A0-S

2h

2000.2

Shizukuishi

103

HM㻌 27iwate_2h06

A0-S

2h

[2000.4]

Hachimantai

104

HM㻌 27iwate_2h05

A0-S

2h

[2000.4]

Hachimantai

105

HM㻌 27iwate_2h03

A0-S

2h

2000.3Morioka106

HM㻌 27iwate_2h01

A0-S

2h

1999

Takizawa

107

HM㻌 28akita-koma_1h03

A3-B

1h

2011.3108

HM㻌 28akita-koma_1h04

A3-B

1h

2010

Yuzawa Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT

Iwate Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT, Iwate,
Morioka, Shizukuishi,
Hachimantai, Takizawa

109

HM㻌 28akita-koma_1h01

A1-B

1h

2003.2

Semboku, Shizukuishi, Akita,
Iwate, Yuzawa Office of Riverand National Highway, MLIT,
Iwate Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT

110

HM㻌 28akita-koma_1h02[A3-B, foldin three]1h2003.2

Semboku, Shizukuishi

111

RM㻌 28akita-koma_1m01

A4-book

1m

2003.2

Semboku, Shizukuishi

112

HM㻌 29chokai_1h01

A2-S

1h

2004.3

Yamagata

113

RM㻌 29chokai_link_01

Web

1m

2003.9

Yamagata,
Hayakawa Lab. Faculty of
Education, Gunma Univ.

114

RM㻌 29chokai_1m03

A4-S, 11sheets1m

2002.3

Yamagata

115

RM㻌 29chokai_1m01

A5-book

1m

2002.3

Yamagata

116

RM㻌 29chokai_1m02

A4-book

1m

2002.3

Yamagata

117

HM㻌 29chokai_2h10

A4-book

2h

2006

Yurihonjo, Nikaho

118

HM㻌 29chokai_2h11

A4-book2h

2006

Sakata, Yuza

119

HM㻌 29chokai_2h01

A1-B

2h

2001.3

Sakata, Yuza

120

HM㻌 29chokai_2h02 *4

A1-B

2h

2001.3

Akita

121

HM㻌 29chokai_2h07

*4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Yurihonjo, Akita

122

HM㻌 29chokai_2h08 *4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Yurihonjo, Akita

123

HM㻌 29chokai_2h03

*4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Yurihonjo, Akita

124

HM㻌 29chokai_2h04 *4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Yurihonjo, Akita

125

HM㻌 29chokai_2h05

*4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Nikaho, Akita

126

HM㻌 29chokai_2h06 *4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Nikaho, Akita

127

HM㻌 29chokai_2h09 *4

A1-B

2h

[2001.3]

Nikaho, Akita

2002.3

Yamagata, Sakata, Yuza

*4: The new hazard map was prepared in 2006. Therefore be careful in handling these old version maps.
29

B

Chokaisan

128

RM㻌 29chokai_2m01[B6-book]－ 179 －

2m

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

No.

Rank

Name of Volcano

Data
No.

33

B

Zaozan129

HM㻌 33zao_1h01

34, 35, B, B,
36
B

Azumayama,
Adatarayama,
Bandaisan

130

34

Azumayama

131

35

36

B

B

B

Adatarayama

Bandaisan

Kind

Date of
Publication

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

A1-B

1h

2002.3

Miyagi, Kawasaki, Zao, Shiroishi,
Shichikashuku, Yamagata Pref.,Yamagata, KaminoyamaRM㻌
34_35_36azu_ada_ban_1m02

A5-book

1m

2012.3

Fukushima Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT

HM㻌 34azuma_1h01

A1-B

1h

2002.2

Fukushima, Inawashiro,
Kitashiobara

Size

132

RM㻌 34azuma_1m01

B2-S

1m

2002

Yonezawa

133

HM㻌 35adata_1h01

A2-S

1h

2002.3

134

RM㻌 35adata_1m01

A4-book

1m

2002.3

Nihonmatsu, Fukushima,
Koriyama, Motomiya, Otama,
Inawashiro

135

HM㻌 36ban_1h02

A1-S

1h

2012.1

Bandai䚸Kitashiobara䚸Inawashiro

136

HM㻌 36ban_1h01

A1-S

1h

2001.5137

RM㻌 36ban_1m01

A4-book

1m

2001.5

Koriyama, Aizuwakamatsu,
Kitakata, Bandai, Kitashiobara,
Inawashiro

138

HM㻌 39nasu_1h01

A1-S

1h

2002.3

139

HM㻌 39nasu_1h03

A3-S

1h

2010.3

140

HM㻌 39nasu_1h02

A3-S

1h

2002.3

141

RM㻌 39nasu_1m01[in English] *5

A3-S

1m

2002.3

Kanto / Chubu

39

B

Nasudake

Nasushiobara, Nasu,
Tochigi*5: The publisher makes the following statement: The map is prepared not for publication but on a trial basis.
39

44

45

B

B

A

Nasudake

KusatsuShiranesan

Asamayama

142

RM㻌 39nasu_1m03

A4-book1m2010.3

143

RM㻌 39nasu_1m02

A4-book

1m

2002.3

144

HM㻌 44kusatsu_1h01

B2-B

1h

1995.3Kusatsu, Tsumagoi, Naganohara,
Nakanojo

145

RM㻌 44kusatsu_1m01

B5-book

1m

1997.5

Gunma

146

RM㻌 44kusatsu_1m02

A4-book

1m

1996.3

Gunma

147

HM㻌 45asama_1h01

A3-B

1h

[2011.8.16]

Nasushiobara, Nasu, Tochigi

Gunma

148

RM㻌 45asama_1m04

A4-book

1m

2003.11

Komoro, Saku, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

149

RM㻌 45asama_1m03

A1-B

1m

2003.3Tone River System Sabo Work
Office, MLIT, Nagano, Gunma

150

RM㻌 45asama_1m02

A4-book

1m

1999.3

Nagano151

RM㻌 45asama_1m01

B5-book

1m

1997.5

Gunma

152

RM㻌 45asama_1m05

A4-book

1m

1997.3

Gunma

153

HM㻌 45asama_2h22[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

154

HM㻌 45asama_2h23[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

155

HM㻌 45asama_2h24[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

156

HM㻌 45asama_2h25[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

157

HM㻌 45asama_2h26[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

158

HM㻌 45asama_2h27[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

2h

2013.3

Saku

Cover page:
A4 wide,Other page:
A4,
Attached map:
A1-B

－ 180 －

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material

No.

45

47

50

Rank

A

B

B

Name of Volcano

Asamayama

NiigataYakeyama

Yakedake

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

159

HM㻌 45asama_2h28[in Japanese, English, Chinese,
Thai]

160

HM㻌 45asama_2h04

161

Kind

Date of
Publication2h2013.3

Saku

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Saku

HM㻌 45asama_2h03

A1-S

2h

1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Tsumagoi

162

HM㻌 45asama_2h21

A3-B

2h

2010.3.1

Komoro163

HM㻌 45asama_2h12

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Komoro164

HM㻌 45asama_list_only_01

A1-S

2h

1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

165

HM㻌 45asama_2h20

A3-B

2h

[2011.12]

Karuizawa

166

HM㻌 45asama_2h19

A3-B

2h

2010.3.1

Karuizawa

167

HM㻌 45asama_2h06

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Karuizawa

168

HM㻌 45asama_2h05

A1-S

2h

1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

169

HM㻌 45asama_2h18

A3-B

2h

[2013.8]

Miyota170

HM㻌 45asama_2h17

A3-B

2h

2010.3.1

Miyota171

HM㻌 45asama_2h10

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Miyota1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

Size

A1-S

2h

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

172

HM㻌 45asama_2h09

173

HM㻌 45asama_2h16

A3-B

2h

[2012.7]

Naganohara

174

HM㻌 45asama_2h15

A3-B

2h

2010.3.1

Naganohara

175

HM㻌 45asama_2h08

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Naganohara

176

HM㻌 45asama_2h07

A1-S

2h

1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

177

HM㻌 45asama_2h14

A3-B

2h

[2012]

Tsumagoi

178

HM㻌 45asama_2h13

A3-B

2h

2010.3.1

Tsumagoi

179

HM㻌 45asama_2h02

A1-B

2h

2003.11

Tsumagoi180

HM㻌 45asama_2h01

A1-S

2h

1995.3

Saku, Komoro, Karuizawa,
Miyota, Naganohara, Tsumagoi

181

HM㻌 47nii-yake_1h02

A1-B

1h

2004.5Itoigawa

182

HM㻌 47nii-yake_1h03[in English]

A1-B

1h

2004.5Itoigawa

183

HM㻌 47nii-yake_1h01

A1-B

1h

2001.3

Itoigawa

184

RM㻌 47nii-yake_1m01

A4-book1m

2004.5Itoigawa

185

HM㻌 50yake_1h02

A4-book

1h2003.9

Takayama, Jintsu River System
Sabo Work Office, MLIT

186

HM㻌 50yake_1h01 *6

A2-B

1h

2002.3.28

Gifu*6: The publisher makes the following statement: This map shows the areas threatened by the hazards of volcanic cinders, pyroclastic flows, pyroclastic
surges, volcanic mudflows caused by snow melting, and avalanches of rocks and earth that should be given particular attention in the case where Mt.
Yakedake erupts on the same scale [30 million m3 in one direction] as the Nakao pyroclastic flow, or the latest magmatic explosion [about 2,000 yearsago.] In addition, the map shows the range of volcanic cinders caused by phreatic explosion. [The range of ash fall is not shown on the map.] However,
not all the areas shown on the map are hazardous depending on a volcanic crater. If the eruption lasts a long time, the hazardous areas may bebroadened. In addition, be careful about other possible hazards, such as debris avalanches and volcanic gas flow.
50

53

B

B

Yakedake

Ontakesan

187

RM㻌 50yake_1m01

A4-book

1m

2002

188

RM㻌 53ontake_1m02

A5-book

1m2009.3

Gifu

189

RM㻌 53ontake_1m01

A4-book

1m

2002

Gifu

190

HM㻌 53ontake_2h04

A4-B,
four-page
spread2h2009.2

Gifu

191

HM㻌 53ontake_2h02

A2-B

2h

2005.3

Gifu

192

HM㻌 53ontake_2h01

A2-B

2h

2002.3.29

Gifu

193

HM㻌 53ontake_2h03

A2-B

2h

2002.3.29

Kiso, Otaki, Nagano－ 181 －Gifu

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

No.

55

Rank

B

Name of Volcano

Fujisan

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication
2004.6

194

RM㻌 55fuji_1m03

A2-S *7

1m

195

RM㻌 55fuji_1m04

A4-B

1m

[2004]

196

RM㻌 55fuji_1m05

A3-book1m

2004.6

197

RM㻌 55fuji_link_01[A4-book]

1m

2004.6

198

RM㻌 55fuji_link_02[A4-book]

1m

2004.6

199

RM㻌 55fuji_1m06

1m

2007.11200

RM㻌 55fuji_1m07[240×
109 mm,book]

1m2005.1

201

RM㻌 55fuji_1m08

1m

2006.3202

RM㻌 55fuji_1m09[in English]

1m

2006.3

203

RM㻌 55fuji_1m02

B1-B

1m

2001.6

204

RM㻌 55fuji_1m10[A4-book]

1m

2006.1

205

RM㻌 55fuji_1m11[A4-book]

1m

2005.2

206

RM㻌 55fuji_1m01[A4-book]

1m

2000.11[A4-B, fold inthree]

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

Cabinet Office, Government ofJapan.

Sabo Works at Mt.Fuji, MLIT

Sabo Works at Mt.Fuji, MLIT,
Yamanashi, Shizuoka

Mt. Fuji Volcanic Disaster
Prevention Conference[Fujiyoshida, Fujikawaguchuko,
Nishikatsura, Yamanakako,
Oshino, Narusawa, Minobu]

207

HM㻌 55fuji_2h14[in English]

A3-B

2h

2007.6208

HM㻌 55fuji_2h26

A1-B

2h

2010.3209

HM㻌 55fuji_2h07

A1-B

2h

2006.3

210

HM㻌 55fuji_2h25

A1-B

2h

2010.3211

HM㻌 55fuji_2h08

A1-B

2h

2006.3212

HM㻌 55fuji_2h24

A1-B

2h

2010.3213

HM㻌 55fuji_2h08

A1-B

2h

2006.3214

HM㻌 55fuji_2h23

A1-B

2h

2010.3215

HM㻌 55fuji_2h10

A1-B

2h

2006.3216

HM㻌 55fuji_2h22

A1-B

2h

2010.3217

HM㻌 55fuji_2h11

A1-B

2h

2006.3218

HM㻌 55fuji_2h27

A1-B

2h

2012

Oshino219

HM㻌 55fuji_2h21

A1-B

2h

2010.3

220

HM㻌 55fuji_2h12

A1-B

2h

2006.3221

HM㻌 55fuji_2h20

A1-B

2h

2010.3

222

HM㻌 55fuji_2h13

A1-B

2h

2006.3

Mt. Fuji Volcanic Disaster
Prevention Conference[Fujiyoshida, Fujikawaguchiko,
Nishikatsura, Yamanakako,
Oshino, Narusawa, Minobu],
Yamanashi

Mt. Fuji Volcanic Disaster
Prevention Conference[Fujiyoshida, Fujikawaguchiko,
Nishikatsura, Yamanakako,
Oshino, Narusawa, Minobu],
Yamanashi

223

HM㻌 55fuji_2h04

A4-book2h2004.11

Mt. Fuji Volcanic Disaster
Prevention Conference[Fujiyoshida, Fujikawaguchuko,
Nishikatsura, Yamanakako,
Oshino, Narusawa, Minobu]

224

HM㻌 55fuji_2h19

A2-B

2h

2004.3

Gotenba225

HM㻌 55fuji_2h01[in Japanese and English]

A4-book2h2004.3

Gotenba226

HM㻌 55fuji_2h18

A2-B

2h

2009

Fujinomiya

227

HM㻌 55fuji_2h02

A2-B

2h

2004.3

Fujinomiya

228

HM㻌 55fuji_2h17

A2-B

2h

[2007]Fuji

229

HM㻌 55fuji_2h16

A2-B

2h

[2007]Fuji

230

HM㻌 55fuji_2h15

A4-book2h2010.3

Fuji

231

HM㻌 55fuji_2h03

A1-B

2h

[2004.3]

Fuji

232

HM㻌 55fuji_2h06

A2-B

2h

[2005]

Susono233

HM㻌 55fuji_2h05

A2-B

2h

2004.11.12

Oyama－ 182 －

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material

No.

Rank

Name of Volcano

Data
No.

B

Fujisan

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

RM㻌 55fuji_2m03

A2-S *72m

2004.6

235

RM㻌 55fuji_2m04

A2-S

*7

2m

2004.6236

RM㻌 55fuji_2m05

A2-S *72m

2004.6

237

RM㻌 55fuji_2m02

A2-S *72m

2004.6

238

RM㻌 55fuji_2m01

A2-S *72m

2004.6234

55

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

Cabinet Office, Government ofJapan.

*7: The publisher makes the following statement:㻌 A2-size, A3-size, one-side, double-side editions [with whole edition printed on the back], and a
combination of various editions are available.

56

57

58

62

B

B

A

A

Hakoneyama

Izu-Tobu
Volcanoes

Izu-Oshima

239

HM㻌 56hakone_1h02

A4-book240

HM㻌 56hakone_1h01

241

RM㻌 56hakone_1m01

242

1h

2009

HakoneA4-book

1h

2004

Hakone

A2-S

1m

2004

[Hakone]RM㻌 59izutoubu_1m01

A4-book

1m

2011.1

Shizuoka243

HM㻌 58izu-o_1h01

A1-S

1h

[1994.3]

Oshima244

RM㻌 58izu-o_1m02

B5-book

1m

1994.7Oshima245

RM㻌 58izu-o_1m01

B5-book

1m

1991.11Oshima246

HM㻌 62miyake_1h06

A2-B

1h

2012.4

Miyake247

HM㻌 62miyake_1h05

A4-book

1h2012.3

Miyake248

HM㻌 62miyake_1h04

A4-book

1h2008.3

Miyake249

HM㻌 62miyake_1h03

A2-B

1h

2005.1

Miyake, Tokyo250

HM㻌 62miyake_1h02

A2-B

1h

2003.4

Miyake, Tokyo251

HM㻌 62miyake_1h01[B2-S]

1h

1994

Miyake252

RM㻌 62miyake_1m04
CD Vol. 1, Vol. 2 *8

A4-book with
two CD-ROMs

1m

2007.3

Tokyo

253

RM㻌 62miyake_1m03 *8

A4-book witha CD-ROM1m

2008.2

Miyake254

RM㻌 62miyake_1m03 *9

A4-book

1m

2008.2

Miyake255

RM㻌 62miyake_1m03[in English] *9

A4-book

1m

2008.2

MiyakeMiyakejima*8: Because the attached CD-ROM contains information other than that printed in the booklet, the contents of the CD-ROM are included in thisdatabase. The data files for browsing and those for printing are linked.
*9: Because data files Nos. 254 and 255 are recorded on the same CD-ROM (enclosed) as file No. 253, they are linked to file No. 253.

62

A

Miyakejima

256

RM㻌 62miyake_1m02

A4-book

1m

2005.12

Miyake257

RM㻌 62miyake_1m01

A4-book

1m

2005.1

Miyake258

RM㻌 62miyake_2h01

A3-book2h2005.5

Miyake, Tokyo

Kyushu

81,
82

83

B, C

B

Tsurumidake andGarandake,
Yufudake

Kujusan259

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_1h02

A1-S

1h

2006.6260

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_1h03

A4-book

1h2006.6261

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_1h01

A1-S

1h

[2003]

Oita

262

RM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_1m01

A2-S

1m

[2006]

Oita

263

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_2h01

A4-S

2h

2006.6264

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_2h02[in English]

A4-S

2h

2006.6265

HM㻌 1-82tsuru-yufu_2h03[in Chinese]

A4-S

2h

2006.6266

HM 81-82tsuru-yufu_2h04[in Korea]

A4-S

2h

2006.6

Oita, Beppu, Yufu, Usa, HijiOita, Beppu, Yufu, Usa, Hiji267

HM㻌 83kuju_1h01

A1-S

1h

2004.3

Oita

268

HM㻌 83kuju_2h01

A4-book2h2010.6

Takeda－ 183 －

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

No.

Rank

Name of Volcano

Data
No.
269

84

A

Asosan270

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM
HM㻌 84aso_1h02

HM㻌 84aso_1h01

*10

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

A4-book

1h2008.3

Kumamoto

1995.3Aso, Minamioguni, Oguni,
Ubuyama, Yamato, Takamori,Minamiaso, Nishihara, Asobroader-based local government
clerical work union

A1-B

1h

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]*10: The publisher makes the following statement: The reference material was published on 1995 and includes many differences from the present statebecause of the consolidation of municipalities in 2005, and therefore care is needed in handling the material.

84

85

A

A

AsosanUnzendake

271

HM㻌 84aso_2h02

A4-book

2h2012.4

Aso272

HM㻌 84aso_2h01

A4-book2h2010.4

Aso
Takamori

273

HM㻌 84aso_2h03

A4-book

2h2012.3274

RM㻌 85unzen_1m01

A4-book1m

2004.3275

RM㻌 85unzen_1m02

A4-book1m

2004.3276

HM㻌 85unzen_2h05

B2-B

2h

2007.3

Shimabara277

HM㻌 85unzen_2h02

A2-S

2h

2002

Shimabara278

HM㻌 85unzen_2h06

B2-S

2h

1999

Shimabara279

HM㻌 85unzen_2h01

B2-S

2h

1994

Shimabara280

HM㻌 85unzen_2h03

B2-S

2h

1997

Shimabara281

HM㻌 85unzen_2h04 *11

B2-S

2h

[1993]

Minamishimabara

Unzen Restoration Work Office*11: The publisher makes the following statement: The map was prepared during the disaster of Mt. Fugendake in 1993, and therefore mudslide-control
and other dams on the map are completely different from the present state after completion of the dams in 2006.
85

87

A

B

Unzendake

Kirishimayama

282

RM㻌 85unzen_2m01

A4-book

2m

1994

Shimabara283

RM㻌 85unzen_2m02

A3-S

2m

[1991]

Shimabara,
Sabo Technical Center284

HM㻌 87kiri_1h01

A1-B

1h

2009.3

Miyakonojo, Kobayashi, Ebino,
Takaharu, Yusui, Kirishima, Soh

285

RM㻌 87kiri_1m05

A3-B

1m

2012.3286

RM㻌 87kiri_1m04[in English]

A3-B

1m

2012.3287

RM㻌 87kiri_1m03

A4-book

1m

2008.3288

RM㻌 87kiri_1m02

A4-book

1m

2005.8289

RM㻌 87kiri_1m01

A4-book

1m

1996.3

Miyakonojo, Kobayashi, Ebino,
Takaharu, Yusui, Kirishima

290

HM㻌 87kiri_2h07

A3-S

2h

1996.3

Miyakonojo

291

HM㻌 87kiri_2h06

A1-S

2h

1996.3

Miyakonojo, Kobayashi, Ebino,
Takaharu, Yusui, Kirishima

292

HM㻌 87kiri_2h11

A1-B

2h

2012.3

Kobayashi

293

HM㻌 87kiri_2h04

A1-S

2h

1996.3294

HM㻌 87kiri_2h02

A1-S

2h

1996.3295

HM㻌 87kiri_2h05

A1-S

2h

1996.3296

HM㻌 87kiri_2h09

A1-S

2h

1996.3297

HM㻌 87kiri_2h08

A1-S

2h

1996.3298

HM㻌 87kiri_2h10

A1-S

2h

2011

Kirisima

299

HM㻌 87kiri_2h03

A1-S

2h

1996.3300

HM㻌 87kiri_2h01

A1-S

2h

1996.3

Miyakonojo, Kobayashi, Ebino,
Takaharu, Yusui, Kirishima

301

RM㻌 87kiri_2m02

A2-S

2m

1991

Takaharu

302

RM㻌 87kiri_2m01

A2-S

2m

í

Takaharu－ 184 －

Kyushu Regional Environment
OfficeMiyazaki Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT

Miyakonojo, Kobayashi, Ebino,
Takaharu, Yusui, Kirishima

List of Database on Volcanic Hazard Maps and Reference Material

No.

90

93

94

96

97

Rank

A

A

B

B

A

Name of Volcano

Sakurajima

Satsuma-Iojima

Kuchino-erabujima

Nakanoshima

Suwanosejima

Data
No.

Name ofhazard map : HM /reference material :RM

Size

Kind

Date of
Publication

Publisher or Reference[As of March, 20013]

303

HM㻌 90sakura_1h03

B2-S

1h

2006.3Kagoshima

304

HM㻌 90sakura_1h02

B2-S

1h

2002

Kagoshima, Tarumizu

305

HM㻌 90sakura_1h01

B2-S

1h

1994

Kagoshima, Tarumizu

306

RM㻌 90sakura_1m02

A4-B

1m

2007.1

Osumi Office of River andNational Highway, MLIT307

RM㻌 90sakura_1m01

B6-book1m

1994

Kagoshima, Tarumizu

308

HM㻌 90sakura_2h02

B2-S

2h

2010

Kagoshima309

HM㻌 90sakura_2h01

A3-B

2h

2011

Tarumizu

310

RM㻌 90sakura_2m02

A4-book2m

2012.3Kagoshima

311

RM㻌 90sakura_2m01

A3-S

2m

2006.6.14

Kagoshima

312

HM㻌 93satsuma-io_1h01 *12

A3-S,
2 sheets

1h313

RM㻌 93satsuma-io_1m01

A4-book

1m[First Ed.
1996]

Kagoshima

*12

314

HM㻌 94kuchino_1h01 *12

A3-S,
2 sheets

1h315

RM㻌 94kuchino_1m01*12

A4-book1m

316

HM㻌 96nakano_1h01 *12

A3-S,
2 sheets

1h317

RM㻌 96nakano_1m01 *12

A4-book1m

318

HM㻌 97suwanose_1h01 *12

A3-S,
2 sheets

1h319

RM㻌 97suwanose_1m01 *12

A4-book

1m*12: These materials are extracted from "Kagoshima prefecture regional plan for disaster prevention".

－ 185 －

[First Ed.
1996][First Ed.
1996][First Ed.
1996]

Kagoshima
Kagoshima
Kagoshima
Kagoshima
Kagoshima
Kagoshima
Kagoshima

Technical Note of the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, No. 380 ; July, 2013

Location Map on Volcanoes

1
3

7

an
Ioz keeaoanak
tok sud hoz
nd
u
a
c
ke
ire
ak
Ra
en
Sh
e
ida
T
M
ch
ka
To
2

10

ra
tta
Ku n
a
Es

19

55

62

Mi

e
t ak
ga
ma
n
a
n
sa
-ko
a
m
ate kita aoz
ya ke ara da am
Iw
A
Z
s
28
27
ata asu ay
33
ma oe
Ad N am eya lcan
39
o
35
n
As
ko u V a
45
Ha ob
m
i
56
u-T osh jimaze
Izu yak
I
57

58

83

8

87

ak

9

e

9

9

a
a
a
a
jim
im
am
him sej-iosayma
n o a no
im
ka
w
t su
ris
Ki
Na 7 Su
Sa
6
3

d
an
ar
,G
ke
ida
um
ur
Ts
an s an81
ju so
Ku 4 As

in
ch
Ku

e
ak
fud
e
ak
Yu
a
nd ma
82
e
i
j
z
jim
a
bu
Un kur
ra
Sa
oe
85

90

94

－ 186 －

14

53

i
ur
up
an
os an
At aes
5
m
ke
ru
ata
Ta n
ag
a
12
u z k om
Us idoa
15
ma
a
kk
ya
am
Ho
n
ke
an
n
y
s
a
a
i
a
s
a
18
isa ta-yemaum i s an
ok
i
ak
ya
an
Az
Iw Ak
Ch
ke
hir
da
s
n
34
25
22
29
-ya
uBa
at s
ata
e
30
s
k
g
i
a
Ku
Ni
ed san
44
47
ak
e
k
Y
50
nta
O
an
j is
Fu

JAPAN