9Disaster Responses of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan:
Special Focus on Tsunami Inundation Mapping
Hiroshi UNE1* and Mamoru KOARAI2*1

Geospatial Information Authority of Japan,
1 Kitasato, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki, 305-0811 Japan
2
College of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism,
2-2-1, Kihei-cho, Kodaira-shi, Tokyo, 187-0044 Japan*e-mail: une@gsi.go.jp

Abstract
The Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI) has put forward its best efforts to support thevictims and damaged regions by surveying and providing geospatial information, for example, distributing
maps and aerial photos, observing crustal movement and mapping inundation areas as quickly as possible.
The “tsunami flood area overview map” it provided has been particularly useful in various geographical analyses of tsunami damage. This paper summarizes the activities of the GSI in response to the Great East Japan
Earthquake of 2011 off the Pacific coast of the Tohoku region, and some of the results of its analyses of therelationship between tsunami damage and geographic conditions such as land use, elevation and land
condition.
Key words: disaster response, elevation, land condition, land use, tsunami damage, tsunami inundation map

1. Introduction
The Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI)
is the only national organization in Japan’s governmentthat is responsible for conducting basic surveying andmapping of the current conditions of national land inJapan and coordinating the provision of basic geospatial
information. One of its important tasks is to provide
geospatial information for all processes of disasterprevention, including mitigation, preparation, response
and recovery. Especially on the occasion of a large
disaster, the GSI is expected to provide proper geospatial
information promptly on such items as the status ofdamage and geographical setting of the damaged area tosupport the emergency rescue and relief operations.
The Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011 off the
Pacific coast in the Tohoku region (hereinafter “the 3.11
earthquake”) took place at 14:46 local time on March 11,
2011. The epicenter was located about 130 km ESE off
the Tohoku coast. Its magnitude, 9.0, was the largest
observed in Japanese history and was the fourth largest in
the world since 1900. In addition to terrible shaking, themain shock brought a gigantic tsunami wave more thanten meters high with a maximum run-up height of 40 mover a wide range of the Pacific coast in the Tohoku
region.
Just after the occurrence of the 3.11 earthquake, theGSI went into emergency status and immediately set up
Global Environmental Research
18/2014: 9-18
printed in Japanan emergency headquarters (EHQ) to serve as the decision making body for disaster operations. The first EHQ
meeting was held at 15:10, within thirty minutes of themain shock. In accordance with the decisions of the EHQ,
the GSI took various actions to support the victims anddamaged regions by surveying and providing geospatial
information, such as distributing maps and aerial photos,
observing crustal movement and mapping inundation
areas, under full collaboration with private surveying
companies and related organizations.
Among its efforts, three major emergency response
activities were 1) provision of maps, 2) detection ofground surface movement using the Global Navigation
Statellite System (GNSS) control point network, and 3)
aerial surveys including interpreting photos of damaged
areas.

2. Disaster Prevention and Geospatial
Information
In principle, the workings of nature and humanactivities are always closely interacting with each other.
Needless to say, we receive myriad diverse blessingsfrom nature, but if we fail to coexist with nature, causing
conflicts, the result may be disaster. The workings ofnature are simply the results of physical phenomena,differing space to space. They follow physical principles,
depending on location and local conditions. Therefore, it©2014 AIRIES

10

H. UNE and M. KOARAI

is crucial that we understand the workings of nature andits interaction with human activities geographically tocope with disasters, in other words, geospatial information on disasters is indispensable to disaster prevention.
In Japan, the Basic Act for Disaster Countermeasuresdesignates relevant government agencies and otherorganizations for disaster response operations. The GSI isincluded as one of them, having a legal authority providing GSI with a mandate to work on disasters. In 2012, on
the basis of the lessons learned about the usefulness of
geospatial information in the disaster response for the
3.11 earthquake, the above act was amended to include a
provision for maximizing the use of geospatial information in the collection and communication of information concerning disaster prevention, reflecting larger
expectations by the government for the geospatial
community to provide proper geospatial information
promptly.

3. Emergency Response Activities of GSI
Immediately after the 3.11 earthquake, the GSI delivered maps of damaged areas to relevant government
offices, starting from small-scale maps sent to central
government offices via the Internet or in the form of
paper maps. In addition to map data, the GSI dispatchedliaison staff to those offices to provide services for
preparing maps of synoptic views of the damage andrecovery status for their briefings. The GSI also dispatched its staff to onsite headquarters of the government
for disaster management, with map data and equipment,

including computers and large-sized printers to provide
paper maps in response to the needs of officials in chargeof rescue and relief operations.
As for the detection of ground surface movement, the
GSI made the best use of its GNSS control point network.
Since 1995 the GSI has installed GEONET (GNSS Earth
Observation Network System), with more than 1,200
GNSS continuous observation stations throughout thecountry for location reference services and detection ofcrustal deformation. After the main shock of the 3.11
earthquake, the GSI made its best efforts to get initial
results of ground surface movements within a few hours.
Ultimately, analysis of the observed data revealed that the
maximum movement was 5.3 meters in the horizontal
direction and minus 1.2 meters in vertical (Fig. 1).
In order to get a grasp of the situation with regard todamage, an aerial survey was conducted starting from thenext day, covering the whole coastal region, except
around the crippled nuclear reactors. The GSI possesses
its own aircraft, “Kunikaze 3,” and a special crew teamfor aerial surveys, but the damaged area to be covered
was assumed to be extremely large, obviously far beyond
the coverage ability of a single aircraft. In case the GSI is
not available to implement emergency tasks when adisaster occurs, it has entered into an “Agreement on
Emergency Photography for Disaster Occurrence” since2005 with private surveying companies to receive assistance in conducting emergency photography efficiently.
Immediately after the earthquake, the GSI decided torequest collaborative work based on this agreement to
conduct coordinated emergency photography. The
weather during the next few days was cooperative, and

42°

42°

41°

41°

40°

40°

39°

39°

38°

38°

37°

37°

36°

36°

35°

35°

138°

139°

140°

141°

142°

143°

144°

138°

139°

140°

141°

142°

143°

Fig. 1 Ground surface movements observed by GEONET. Left: horizontal deformation; right: vertical deformation(Imakiire & Kobayashi, 2011). From: 2011/03/01 21:00 - 2011/03/09 21:00 To: 2011/03/11 18:00 - 2011/03/11 21:00

144°

Disaster Responses of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan11

the air crew teams were able to take aerial photos ofmajor damaged areas on March 12 and 13. The remaining
areas were covered in subsequent survey missions by the
GSI. Such a collaborative framework will need to function well on the occasion of expected future large-scale
earthquakes and tsunamis such as the Nankai TroughEarthquake. In addition, the GSI is promoting development of applications for the latest remote-sensing technology such as the synthetic aperture radar imaging fromaerial platforms in the case of disasters occurring under
bad weather or at night.
As a result of the emergency photography, color aerial
photographs of a total of approximately 6,900 km2 of theaffected areas were taken, mostly at a scale of 1:20,000(Fig. 2). The acquired data were processed as quickly as
possible, mobilizing resources through the night. Aerial
photo data were delivered to major governmentalorganizations and uploaded to the GSI’s website the nextday, March 14. Table 1 shows the number of aerial photo
sheets taken during the emergency photography by the
GSI for major recent earthquakes in Japan, indicating
how extensive the photography for the 3.11 earthquake
was. The results enable comparison with photos taken before the earthquake to highlight the damage caused by thetsunamis (Fig. 3).
The GSI decided to create a “tsunami flood area
overview map” to ascertain the tsunami damage situation.
As the aerial photos came in, the GSI staff started working on photo interpretation of the inundated areas andcompiled their results on 1:25,000 topographic maps
using GIS software. Then the results were digitally

Fig. 2 Areas covered by the aerial photographs taken
after the 3.11 earthquake by the GSI.

Table 1 Numbers of aerial photo sheets taken through emergency photography by the GSI for major recent earthquakes inJapan (*as of March 1, 2014, after the Fire and Disaster Management Agency).
Name of earthquake

Date

Magnitude

Casualties
Dead
Missing
18,958* 2,655*

The Great East Japan Earthquake of 20112011.3.11

9.0

The Iwate-Miyagi Nairiku Earthquake of 20082008.6.14

7.2

17

The Niigataken Chuetsu-oki Earthquake of 20072007.7.16

6.8

15

The Mid-Niigata Prefecture Earthquake of 2004

2004.10.23

6.8

68

The 1995 Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake

1995.1.17

7.3

6,434

6

Number of
aerial photos
2,759
596
157
617

3

Fig. 3 An example of aerial photo images of a damaged area (Kesennuma City).
Left: before the tsunami; right: after the tsunami (Hasegawa et al., 2011).

1,097

12

H. UNE and M. KOARAI

copied to 1:100,000 scale maps for a better understandingof the whole picture of the damage. These were uploaded
to the GSI’s website (Fig. 4). The results showed that theinundated areas came to as much as 561 km2 in total.

(a)4. The GSI’s Activities During the Recovery
Stage
A few weeks after the earthquake, the GSI started twoother projects for recovery of the damaged areas. The
first one was a resurvey of control points. Due to the large
ground displacement, it was indispensable to resurvey
the control points to revise their coordinates, so thatreconstruction activities could be initiated. In addition,
for reconstruction planning, the GSI prepared large-scalebase maps at a scale of 1:2,500 for the damaged areas.
As for the resurvey of control points, about 1,900
triangulation points and about the same number of benchmarks were resurveyed. For about 43,000 control points
that were not directly resurveyed, coordinate correction
parameters were provided and revised coordinates were
calculated. In addition, since the horizontal and verticalorigins of the country’s geodetic coordinate system
located in Tokyo were displaced, their coordinates werealso revised. This whole process was completed in lessthan eight months after the earthquake, and contributed
significantly to the recovery process.
For the preparation of large-scale maps, aerial photos
were taken again after the debris had been removed frommost of the damaged areas. The compiled maps were
provided in less than a year after the earthquake forrecovery planning.

(b)

5. Tsunami Inundation and Land Use

Fig. 4 An example of a “tsunami flood area overview map”
compiled on a 1:25,000 topographic map (a) anddigitally copied to a 1:100,000 scale map (b).

The GSI created a “land-use map of tsunami-flooded
areas” to investigate the relationship between tsunami
inundation and land use, by combining results of interpreting the tsunami- inundated area mentioned above andthe land use subdivision mesh data (FY 2006) of theDigital National Land Information released by the

Table 2 Land use classification (Nakajima & Koarai, 2011).
Land use classification in this survey
Buildings/ arterial
traffic sites

Buildings
Arterial traffic

Land for other uses
Paddies/other farmland /forests/
wasteland/ golf courses

Rivers and lakes/seashores/salt water

Digital National Land Information
Land use subdivision mesh data
Type of land use
Building grounds
Arterial traffic areas
Land for other uses
Paddies
Other farmland
Forests
Wasteland
Golf courses
Rivers and lakes
Seashores
Sea water

Reference in definition
Residential/ urban areas
Roads/ railways/ yards
Athletic complexes, airports, race tracks/ baseball fields/
school port districts/ vacant artificial land, etc.

Disaster Responses of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan

National and Regional Planning Bureau of the Ministryof Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)(Koarai et al., 2011; Nakajima & Koarai, 2011). Land use
data were reclassified as shown in Table 2. Figure 5 provides a part of the map showing the area from
Matsushima Bay to the Sendai Plain (from Matsushima
Town, Matsushima District to Watari Town, Watari
District of Miyagi Prefecture).
Table 3 shows the land use component ratio of theinundated areas by prefecture. Of the entire inundated
area, paddy fields had the highest ratio, at 37%, followedby building grounds (20%), land with other uses (10%),rivers and lakes (9%), and forests (7%). By prefecture,

13

Miyagi and Fukushima had high ratios of paddy fields
and Iwate had a high ratio of building grounds, whereas
Aomori, Ibaraki and Chiba had high ratios of seashores
and land for other uses. These differences are explainedby differences in large-scale landforms. While the building grounds were concentrated in the narrow coastal
plains in Iwate Prefecture, rice fields were widelydistributed on the seashore plain in Miyagi and
Fukushima prefectures.

6. Relationship Between Tsunami Damage andTsunami Inundation Depth
The authors divided tsunami damage into three categories by interpreting aerial photos: the first rank (Rank
1) was areas completely destroyed, where almost all
wooden buildings were lost; the second rank (Rank 2)
was heavily damaged areas, where a large number ofhouses were destroyed by the tsunami; and the third rank
(Rank 3) was areas with inundation only, where houses
were less damaged (Koarai et al., 2011; Koarai et al.,2012). Figure 6 shows a tsunami damage classification
map of a part of the Sendai Plain, close to Sendai Airport.
Figure 7 gives an overlay map of the tsunami damagelevel and tsunami inundation depth measured on site in
the Sendai Airport area, Iwanuma City, Miyagi Prefecture. This figure shows that the area with tsunami inundation depth exceeding four meters is equivalent to Rank 1,
and the area with tsunami inundation depth exceeding
1.5 meters is equivalent to Rank 2.

7. Relationship Between Tsunami Damage andGeographic Condition such as Landform
Classification and Land Use in Sendai Plain

Fig. 5The authors have noticed that the tsunami damagelevel was closely correlated with geographic condition
such as landforms, elevation and land use in the Sendai
Plain area, where every valley had its own characteristics
of tsunami damage, affected by the shape, inclination anddirection of the valley and the bay it faced in the Sanriku
area.
They have prepared three kinds of digital geographic
information for analyzing the relationship between
tsunami damage and geographic conditions in the Sendai
Plain area (Koarai et al., 2011; Koarai et al., 2012).

Land-use map of tsunami flooded areas around the
Sendai Plain (Nakajima & Koarai, 2011).

Table 3 Land use component ratio of tsunami-inundated areas, by prefecture (%) (Nakajima & Koarai, 2011).

Aomori
Iwate
Miyagi
Fukushima
Ibaraki
Chiba
Total

PaddiesOther
farmland

Forests

Wasteland

Building
grounds

3%
17%
41%
53%
6%
21%
37%

2%
4%
7%
3%
2%
6%
5%

10%
9%
7%
4%
4%
12%
7%

6%
1%
1%
1%
1%
2%
1%

10%
34%
21%
12%
15%
15%
20%

Arterial
traffic
areas
1%
3%
2%
2%
1%
0%
2%

Land for Rivers andother uses
lakes

*The sums of the figures in “Fukushima” and “Total” rows exceed 100% because of rounding off.

21%
15%
8%
9%
23%
8%
10%

9%
10%
10%
7%
6%
2%
9%

Seashores

Seawater

Golf
courses

33%
3%
2%
3%
29%
23%
6%

6%
4%
1%
7%
12%
12%
4%

0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%

14

H. UNE and M. KOARAI

Fig. 6 Tsunami damage map of the Sendai Plain(Koarai et al., 2012).

Fig. 7 Relationship between tsunami damage categories andinundation depths measured on site in the Sendai Airport
area (Koarai et al., 2012).

Digital landform classification data were preparedfrom existing Land Condition Maps for “Sendai” and“Iwanuma” produced by the GSI and interpretation of
aerial photos at a scale of 1/10,000 by the authors.
Landform classification was divided into fourteen categories, including mountain slopes; unstable slopes;
terraces or table lands; talus, alluvial fans, natural levees,
sand dunes or sand bars; dents or shallow valleys; valley
plains or flood plains; coastal plains or deltas; backmarshes; former river beds; frequently flooded areas;water; and artificially deformed areas.

Five-meter grid digital elevation model (DEM) data
were also created by the GSI, derived from airborne
LiDAR surveys after the earthquake, executed by Miyagi
Prefecture in March and April, and by the GSI in May
and June 2011.
Land use data are 100-meter grid data of National
Land Information Data by MLIT as formerly mentioned.
The results of the overlay analysis between such geographic information and tsunami damage categories on
the Sendai Plain are shown in Figs. 8, 9 and 10.
Landforms within one kilometer of the coastline aremainly sand dunes or sand bars with slightly higher
elevations. Wide sand bars dominate the area north of the
Abukuma River, but several narrow sand bars dominate
the area south of the Abukuma River. Landforms ofinland areas over one kilometer from the coastline arecoastal plains or deltas. Valley plains or flood plains
dominate along the Nanakita River, Natori River andAbukuma River. Natural levees and former river beds
only dominate along the main large rivers.
Land use on sand dunes or sand bars consists offorests, “other farmland” and building grounds. Forests
dominate the area north from the Abukuma River, but“other farmland” dominates the area south of the
Abukuma River. Land use of inland areas over one
kilometer from the coastline consists mainly of paddy
fields. As building grounds and “other farmland” ininland areas have a zonal distribution along the coastline,
these land uses occur on sand dunes or sand bars in inland
areas.
The results of an overlay analysis between tsunami
damage level and other geographic information are as
follows:
1) The completely destroyed area (Rank 1) was
located within one kilometer from the coastline. The
inundation depth of this area was over four meters, andthe landform classification of this area was almost allsand dunes or sand bars with slightly higher elevationcompared with other areas. While there is a poor relationship between tsunami damage and landform conditions
such as landform classifications or elevation, there is astrong relationship between areas with Rank 1 tsunami
damage and the distance from the coastline.
2) Heavily damaged areas (Rank 2) were observed up
to three or four kilometers from the coastline. The inundation depth of this area was over 1.5 meters, and theelevation was less than one meter. There is a good
relationship between the location of Rank 2 damaged
areas and elevation.
3) Areas with inundation only (Rank 3) wereobserved up to four or five kilometers from the coastline.
The inundation depth of this area was less than 1.5 meters,
and there is a good relationship between the location ofdamaged areas and landform classification. For instance,
certain areas in valley plains and flood plains were unaffected by the tsunami, even though areas with almost thesame altitude on coastal plains and deltas were inundated.

Disaster Responses of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan

Fig. 8 Overlay of tsunami damage andlandform classifications (Koarai
et al., 2012).

Fig. 9 Overlay of tsunami damage and
LiDAR DEM (Koarai et al., 2012).

8. Relationship Between Tsunami Damage andElevation in Cross Sections
For discussion of the relationship between tsunami
damage levels and landform conditions such as inundation depth and elevation, the authors produced six crosssections of elevation of ground surface and tsunami
inundation height along the east-west direction (Koarai
et al., 2011; Koarai et al., 2012). The results are shown in
Figs. 11-16.
The area with Rank 1 tsunami damage was limited towithin one kilometer from the coastline. This area has aslightly higher elevation of about one to three meters, andits inundation depth was over four meters. Just after thetsunami ran over slightly higher landforms such as sanddunes or sand bars into lowlands with zero-meter elevation, such as coastal plains or deltas, the inundation
height decreased sharply and the tsunami damage levelchanged from Rank 1 to Rank 2 (Figs. 11 and 12).
To the north of the mouth of the Abukuma River, thewidth of the sand bar, about 500 m, is narrower than inother areas. At around 500 m from the coastline, theelevation of the ground surface decreases from twometers to zero meters, and the inundation depth also

15

Fig. 10 Overlay of tsunami damage andland use (Koarai et al., 2012).

decreased from five meters to two meters, with thetsunami damage level changing from Rank 1 to Rank 2(Fig. 13).
In the area close to JR Yamashita Station, the elevation of the ground surface and inundation height decrease
sharply from two meters to zero meters and from sevenmeters to three meters, respectively, at the position of 500
meters from the coastline, but the tsunami damage level
did not change (Fig. 14). The boundary line between
Rank 1 and Rank 2 was located at 900 meters from thecoastline. We assume the reason for the difference intsunami damage compared to other areas was brought
about by differences in land use and landform. Forest
dominates over a broad width on the sand bar north of the
Abukuma River, but “other farmland” dominates over anarrow width on the sand bar south of the Abukuma
River. Presumably, the difference in distribution of thecompletely destroyed area was brought about by differences in roughness of the ground surface, such as
between forests and “other farmland.”In the southern part of Yamamoto Town, the boundaryline between tsunami damage Rank 1 and Rank 2 was
located 1.5 kilometers from the coastline (Figs. 15 and
16). We assume the reason for the difference of location

16

H. UNE and M. KOARAI

Fig. 11 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile A (Yuriage, Natori City) (Koarai et al., 2012).

Fig. 12 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile B (Sendai Airport, Iwanuma City) (Koarai et al., 2012).

of the boundary line was brought about by differences inelevation of the sand dunes or sand bars compared to theother areas. As the elevation of the sand dunes or sandbars in the southern part of Yamamoto Town is about one
meter, the inundation height did not change just after thetsunami run-up over the sand dune or sand bar. The
inundation depth was over four meters 1.5 kilometersfrom the coastline, and the tsunami damage level did notchange.

9. Conclusion
In this paper, the emergency countermeasures in
response to the occurrence of the Great East Japan
Earthquake of 2011 off the Pacific coast of the Tohoku
region taken by the Geospatial Information Authority ofJapan (GSI) are outlined, including provision of maps,
observation of crustal movement, aerial surveys, mapping of inundated areas, resurveys of control points,
preparation of large-scale base maps for reconstruction
planning and analysis of the relationship between

damage and geographic conditions. Such information
was immediately provided to central and local government offices via the Internet or in the form of paper maps,
and utilized to support emergency rescue and relief
operations.
As a results of these GIS-based overlay analyses of
the relationships between tsunami damage levels andother geographic data such as inundation depth, landform
classifications, elevation and land use, the following facts
were clarified: 1) damage levels are closely related withinundation depths; 2) the area of complete destruction is
located within one kilometer of the coastline; and 3)
differences in landform and land use in the coastal area
influence the damage level of areas inland.

Acknowledgements
Part of this research was supported by Grants in Aid
for Scientific Research (24240114).

Disaster Responses of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan

Fig. 13 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile C (mouth of the Abukuma River, Iwanuma City and Watari Town) (Koarai et al.,2012).

Fig. 14 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile D (JR Yamashita Station, Yamamoto Town) (Koarai et al., 2012).

Distance from coastline (m)Fig. 15 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile E (Takase, Yamamoto Town) (Koarai et al., 2012).

17

18

H. UNE and M. KOARAIDistance from coastline (m)Fig. 16 Cross section of the ground surface along the east-west direction and tsunami inundation depth
in Profile F (JR Sakamoto Station, Yamamoto Town) (Koarai et al., 2012).

References
Hasegawa, H., K. Saito, H. Takahashi, T. Syudo, O. Kai, M. Hirota,
M. Shibahara, Y. Hatakeyama, M. Nemoto, H. Ohno and T.
Ishizeki (2011) Providing aerial photographs and geographic
information of the disaster area by the Great East Japan Earthquake, Bulletin of the Geospatial Information Authority of Japan,
59: 43-53.
Imakiire, T. and T. Kobayashi (2011) The crustal deformation andfault model of the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku
Earthquake, Bulletin of the Geospatial Information Authority ofJapan, 59: 21-30.
Koarai, M., T. Okatani, T. Nakano and I. Kamiya (2011) Geographic characteristics of tsunami flooded area by the Great East
Japan Earthquake, Journal of the Geospatial Information
Authority of Japan, 122: 97-111.
Koarai, M., T. Okatani, T. Nakano, T. Nakamura and M.
Hasegawa (2012) Geographical information analysis of tsunami
flooded area by the Great East Japan Earthquake using mobile
mapping system, Proceedings of ISPRS 2012 (USB).
Nakajima H. and M. Koarai (2011) Assessment of tsunami flood
situation from the Great East Japan Earthquake, Bulletin of the
Geospatial Information Authority of Japan, 59: 55-66.

Hiroshi UNE
Mr. Hiroshi UNE is a senior staff member at the
Geospatial Information Authority of Japan (GSI),
a part of Japan’s national government. He majoredin geography at the University of Tokyo and joined
the GSI in 1981. Since then he has engaged insurveying and mapping, especially geographic
surveying for disaster prevention. Presently heserves as senior executive officer for the application of geospatial information in disaster management.

Mamoru KOARAI
Dr. Mamoru KOARAI serves as director of theSurveying Department of the College of Land,
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (CLITT),
which is the training organization for the staff ofthe Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport andTourism. He majored in earth science at Ibaraki
University and joined the Geospatial Information
Authority of Japan (GSI) in 1986. Before his transfer to CLITT in April
2014, he had been devoted to research and development activities as thehead of the Geographic Information Analysis Research Division of the GSI
for eight years. He received his Doctoral degree in Earth Science at Ibaraki
University in 2009.

(Received 17 February 2014, Accepted 2 July 2014)