Publication: Learning from Megadisasters : Lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake
Loading...
Files in English
21,273 downloads
Other Files
3,725 downloads
Date
2014-06-26
ISSN
978-1-4648-0153-2
Published
2014-06-26
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
The successes of Japan’s disaster risk management (DRM) system as well as the ways in which that system could be improved are reflected in the lessons drawn from the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) and presented in the initial reports from the Learning from Megadisasters project. The GEJE was the first disaster ever recorded that included an earthquake, a tsunami, a nuclear power plant accident, a power supply failure, and a large-scale disruption of supply chains. Extreme disasters underscore the need for a holistic approach to DRM. Single-sector development planning cannot address the complexity of problems posed by natural hazards, let alone megadisasters, nor can such planning build resilience to threats. Faced with complex risks, Japan chose to build resilience by investing in preventative structural and nonstructural measures; nurturing a strong culture of knowledge and learning from past disasters; engaging in wise DRM regulation, legislation, and enforcement; and promoting cooperation among multiple stakeholders, between government agencies and ministries, between the private sector and the government, and among multiple levels of governance, from local to national to international. The book consolidates a set of 36 Knowledge Notes, research results of a joint study undertaken by the Government of Japan and the World Bank. These notes highlight key lessons learned in seven DRM thematic clusters—structural measures; nonstructural measures; emergency response; reconstruction planning; hazard and risk information and decision making; the economics of disaster risk, risk management, and risk financing; and recovery and relocation. Aimed at sharing Japanese cutting-edge knowledge with practitioners and decision makers, this book provides valuable guidance to other disaster-prone countries for mainstreaming DRM in their development policies and weathering their own natural disasters.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Ranghieri, Federica; Ishiwatari, Mikio. Ranghieri, Federica; Ishiwatari, Mikio, editors. 2014. Learning from Megadisasters : Lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/18864 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication The Great East Japan Earthquake--Learning from Megadisasters : Knowledge Notes, Executive Summary(Washington, DC, 2012)The Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) was the first disaster ever recorded that included an earthquake, a tsunami, a nuclear power plant accident, a power supply failure, and a large-scale disruption of supply chains. On March 11, 2011 earthquake of magnitude 9.0 occurred in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Japan's Tohoku region. The quake shook the ground as far away as western Japan and lasted for several minutes. A half hour later, a tsunami of unprecedented force broke over 650 kilometers of coastline, toppling sea walls and other defenses, flooding more than 500 km of land, and washing away entire towns and villages. This learning from Megadisasters, a knowledge sharing project is sponsored by the Government of Japan and the World Bank. The successes of Japan's Disaster Risk Management (DRM) system, as well as the ways in which that system could be improved, are reflected in the lessons drawn from the GEJE and presented in the initial reports from the Learning from megadisasters project: extreme disasters underscore the need for a holistic approach to DRM, preventive Investments pay, but be prepared for the unexpected, learning from disaster is key, as Japan has shown for the past 2,000 years, DRM is everyone's business, assessing risks and communicating them clearly and widely helps citizens make timely decisions to protect themselves, hazard maps can give the public a false sense of safety, if not properly communicated, Better management of information and communication is crucial in emergencies and recovery operations, coordination mechanisms must be developed and tested in normal times, so that they are ready for use in an emergency, and vulnerable groups must be protected and engaged.Publication GDLN Seminar on Strengthening Disaster Risk Management in East Asia and the Pacific : Volume 1 . Post‐disaster recovery procedures of the Great Hanshin (Kobe earthquake) earthquake and the Great Sumatra‐Andaman earthquake(Washington, DC, 2008-12)In the GLDN seminar, the recovery procedures in the aftermath of the Kobe earthquake and the Asian tsunami were discussed. This introduction to Catastrophe Risk Financing Frameworks seminar provided participants with an understanding of catastrophe risk financing frameworks. In addition, it informed participants of new product lines in risk mitigation and risk finance and transfer and shared experiences of Bank-financed projects, including Turkey's Catastrophic Insurance Pool.Publication A Workbook on Planning for Urban Resilience in the Face of Disasters : Adapting Experiences from Vietnam’s Cities to Other Cities(World Bank, 2012-01-26)This workbook is intended to help policy makers in developing countries plan for a safer future in urban areas in the face of natural disasters and the consequences of climate change. It is based on the experiences of three cities in Vietnam, Can Tho, Dong Hoi, and Hanoi, that worked with international and local experts under World Bank supervision to develop local resilience action plans (LRAPs) in 2009-10. An LRAP is a detailed planning document that reflects local concerns and priorities based on the experiences of the past and projections for the future. It is not a wish list of projects that may never be completed because they are too costly or lack political support. Rather, it should be a realistic document that describes and establishes priorities for specific steps that can be undertaken in the near term to adapt to both climate related and other hazards. Regardless of their size, location, political orientation, or technical capacity, other cities can learn from the experiences of these pilot cities to develop their own LRAPs. The purpose of this workbook is to adapt the initial experiences of Can Tho, Dong Hoi, and Hanoi to benefit the national government and other communities in Vietnam and beyond. Indeed, the process described in this workbook was later adopted in the cities of Iloilo, the Philippines; Ningbo, China; and Yogyakarta, Indonesia, and the concluding chapter of this workbook draws on some of the lessons learned in these cities. However, the workbook, while generalizable to other contexts, largely reflects the Vietnamese experience.Publication Urban Panning, Land Use Regulation, and Relocation(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-09)Reconstruction should include a range of measures to enhance safety: disaster prevention facilities, relocation of communities to higher ground, and evacuation facilities. A community should not, however, rely too heavily on any one of these as being sufficient, because the next tsunami could be even larger than the last. Communities also need to rebuild their industries and create jobs to keep their residents from moving away. The challenge is to find enough relocation sites that are on high enough ground and large enough, and to regulate land use in lowland areas. There are two tiers of local government in Japan, prefectures and local municipalities, which are responsible for disaster response and reconstruction. Municipal governments play the most important role because they are closest to the victims and the stricken areas. The prefectural governments are grappling with the broad reconstruction issues. All reconstruction plans aim at rebuilding towns and communities that are resilient to major disasters.Publication Protecting Significant and Sensitive Facilities(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-09)The Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) was a multi-hazard event. A massive quake triggered a series of tsunamis of unprecedented dimension, as well as the subsequent nuclear accident. Sensitive facilities need to be protected against low-probability and complex events because damage to such facilities can have a cascading effect, multiplying the destruction and leading to irreversible human, social, economic, and environmental impacts. This report gives findings; lessons; and recommendations for developing countries.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.