The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction at Five: Lessons from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami

Abstract

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (SFDRR) represents an inclusive approach to disaster risk reduction, linked to development and recovery. Building on previous international guidelines, the SFDRR promotes practical and measurable outcomes for reducing disaster losses, including indicators to measure progress towards seven specific global targets. Evaluated in the context of the priorities and global targets of the SFDRR, the article considers the case of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami of 2011 to illustrate advances and limitations in pre-disaster tsunami hazard engineering and post-disaster recovery. With respect to the targets set out in the Sendai Framework related to risk reduction and tsunami engineering, especially Priority 1, understanding disaster risk, there have been significant advances in hazard assessment and systems for tsunami detection and warning. Although the SFDRR emphasizes actions in the recovery phase through Priority 4, enhancing disaster preparedness with an emphasis on the concept of build back better, on its own this does not function as a clear directive for guiding recovery. However, the overall people-centered and inclusive approach of the SFDRR, as well as the global targets and several sub-priorities, can be a useful way to shape good practices in recovery and evaluate recovery progress.

Keywords

Build back better / Disaster recovery / Great East Japan Earthquake / Sendai Framework / Tsunami risk

References

[1] Aitsi-Selmi A, Egawa S, Sasaki H, Wannous C, Murray V. The Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction: Renewing the global commitment to people’s resilience, health, and well-being. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2015, 6(2): 164-174

[2] Aoi S, Suzuki W, Chikasada N, Miyoshi T, Arikawa T, Seki K. Development and utilization of real-time tsunami inundation forecast system using s-net data. Journal of Disaster Research, 2019, 14(2): 212-224

[3] Bennett D. Five years later: Assessing the implementation of the four priorities of the Sendai framework for inclusion of people with disabilities. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2020

[4] Cabinet Office. 2015. White paper: Disaster management in Japan 2015. https://www.bousai.go.jp/kyoiku/panf/pdf/WPDM2015_Summary.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020.

[5] Clinton WJ. Lessons learned from tsunami recovery: Key propositions for building back better, United Nations Secretary-General's special envoy for tsunami recovery, 2006, New York: United Nations

[6] Davies G, Griffin J, Løvholt F, Glimsdal S, Harbitz CB, Thio HK, Lorito S, Basili R A global probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment from earthquake sources. Geological Society London Special Publications, 2017, 456(1): 219-244

[7] De Risi, R., and K. Goda. 2016. Probabilistic earthquake-tsunami multi-hazard analysis: Application to the Tohoku region, Japan. Frontiers in Built Environment 2: Article 25. doi:10.3389/fbuil.2016.00025.

[8] Fan L. Disaster as opportunity? Building back better in Aceh, Myanmar and Haiti, 2013, London: Overseas Development Institute

[9] Fukushima Booklet Committee. 2018. Japan’s Dilemma: Nuclear power plant accident and implementation of Sendai Framework for DRR. https://jcc-drr.net/wpJD/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Japans-Dilemma.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020.

[10] Fukutani, Y., A. Suppasri, and F. Imamura. 2018. Quantitative assessment of epistemic uncertainties in tsunami hazard effects on building risk assessments. Geosciences 8(1): Article 17.

[11] Gentile R, Galasso C, Idris Y, Rusydy I, Meilianda E. From rapid visual survey to multi-hazard risk prioritisation and numerical fragility of school buildings. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2019, 19(7): 1365-1386

[12] GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2018. Building back better: Achieving resilience through stronger, faster, and more inclusive post-disaster reconstruction. Washington, DC: GFDRR.

[13] González, F.I., R.J. LeVeque, L.M. Adams, C. Goldfinger, G.R. Priest, and K. Wang. 2014. Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Assessment (PTHA) for Crescent City, CA. Final report for phase I. https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/22366?show=full. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.

[14] Government of Nepal National Planning Commission Post disaster needs assessment, 2015, Kathmandu: Government of Nepal National Planning Commission

[15] GTM (Global Tsunami Model). 2019. Global Tsunami Model. https://edanya.uma.es/gtm/. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.

[16] Horspool N, Pranantyo I, Griffin J, Latief H, Natawidjaja DH, Kongko W, Cipta A, Bustaman B A probabilistic tsunami hazard assessment for Indonesia. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2014, 14(11): 3105-3122

[17] IDNDR (International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction). 1994. Yokohama strategy and plan of action for a safer world: Guidelines for natural disaster prevention, preparedness and mitigation. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/8241. Accessed 4 Apr 2020.

[18] Imai, K., T. Inazumi, K. Emoto, T. Horie, A. Suzuki, K. Kudo, M. Ogawa, M. Noji, et al. 2019. Tsunami vulnerability criteria for fishery port facilities in Japan. Geosciences 9(10): Article 410.

[19] Iuchi K, Maly E, Johnson L. Santiago-Gandino V, Kontar YA, Kaneda Y. Three years after a mega-disaster: Recovery policies, programs and implementation after the Great East Japan Earthquake. Post-tsunami hazard reconstruction and restoration, 2015, London: Springer 29-46

[20] James Lee Witt Associates Building back better and safer: Private sector summit on post-tsunami reconstruction, 2005, Washington, DC: James Lee Witt Associates

[21] JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency). 2019a. Flow of issuance of information about tsunami and earthquake. https://www.data.jma.go.jp/svd/eqev/data/en/guide/info.html. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.

[22] JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency). 2019b. Emergency warning system. https://www.jma.go.jp/jma/en/Emergency_Warning/ew_index.html. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.

[23] Kennedy J, Ashmore J, Babister E, Kelman I. The meaning of ‘build back better’: Evidence from Post-Tsunami Aceh and Sri Lanka. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 2008, 16(1): 24-36

[24] Koshimura S, Oie T, Yanagisawa H, Imamura F. Developing fragility functions for tsunami damage estimation using numerical model and post-tsunami data from Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Coastal Engineering Journal, 2009, 51(3): 243-273

[25] Latcharote P, Leelawat N, Suppasri A, Thamarux P, Imamura F. Estimation of fatality ratios and investigation of influential factors in the 2011 Great East Japan Tsunami. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018, 29: 37-54

[26] Mainichi Shinbun. 2019. More than 200 solitary deaths in reconstructed housing in the 3 affected prefectures, measures need to prevent isolation, Great East Japan Earthquake. 9 September 2019. https://mainichi.jp/articles/20190909/k00/00m/040/318000c. Accessed 3 Apr 2020 (in Japanese).

[27] Maly E. Building back better with people centered housing recovery. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2017, 29: 84-93

[28] Marchezini V. “What is a sociologist doing here?” An unconventional people-centered approach to improve warning implementation in the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2020

[29] Monday JL. Building back better: Creating a sustainable community after disaster. Natural Hazards Informer, 2002, 3: 1-12

[30] Muhari A, Charvet I, Futami T, Suppasri A, Imamura F. Assessment of tsunami hazard in port and its impact on marine vessels from tsunami model and observed damage data. Natural Hazards, 2015, 78(2): 1309-1328

[31] National Police Agency. 2019. Data on disaster victims as of December 2019. https://www.npa.go.jp/news/other/earthquake2011/pdf/higaijokyo.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020 (in Japanese).

[32] NEDA (National Economic and Development Authority). 2013. Reconstruction assistance on Yolanda: Build back better. Manila: NEDA. https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/20131216-RAY.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020.

[33] Olshansky RB, Johnson LA. Clear as mud: Planning for the rebuilding of New Orleans, 2010, Chicago, IL: American Planning Association

[34] Pakoksung K, Suppasri A, Imamura F, Athanasius C, Omang A, Muhari A. Simulation of the submarine landslide tsunami on 28 September 2018 in Palu Bay, Sulawesi Island, Indonesia, using a two-layer model. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2019, 176(8): 3323-3350

[35] Park S, van de Lindt JW, Cox D, Gupta R, Aguiniga F. Successive earthquake-tsunami analysis to develop collapse fragilities. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2012, 16(6): 851-863

[36] Platt S, So E. Speed or deliberation: A comparison of post-disaster recovery in Japan, Turkey, and Chile. Disasters, 2017, 41(4): 696-727

[37] Ranghieri F, Ishiwatari M. Learning from megadisasters: Lessons from the great east Japan earthquake, 2014, Washington, DC: World Bank Group

[38] Reconstruction Agency. 2019a. Data of evacuees as of December 2019. https://www.reconstruction.go.jp/topics/main-cat2/sub-cat2-1/hinanshasuu.html. Accessed 3 Apr 2020 (in Japanese).

[39] Reconstruction Agency. 2019b. Data of related deaths as of December 2019. https://www.reconstruction.go.jp/topics/main-cat2/sub-cat2-6/20191227_kanrenshi.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020 (in Japanese).

[40] Reconstruction Design Council, Government of Japan Toward reconstruction: Hope beyond the disaster, 2011, Tokyo: Reconstruction Design Council, Government of Japan

[41] Saunders W, Kelly S, Paisley S, Clarke L. Progress toward implementing the Sendai framework, the Paris agreement, and the sustainable development goals: Policy from Aotearoa New Zealand. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2020

[42] Seto S, Imamura F, Suppasri A, A. Challenge to build the science of human survival from disaster starting from analysis for the 2011 Tohoku Tsunami. Journal of Disaster Research, 2019, 14(9): 1323-1328

[43] Shoji G, Nakamura T. Damage assessment of road bridges subjected to the 2011 Tohoku Pacific earthquake tsunami. Journal of Disaster Research, 2017, 12(1): 79-89

[44] Suppasri A, Koshimura S, Imamura F. Developing tsunami fragility curves based on the satellite remote sensing and the numerical modeling of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami in Thailand. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2011, 11(1): 173-189

[45] Suppasri, A., A. Muhari, T. Futami, F. Imamura, and N. Shuto. 2014. Loss functions of small marine vessels based on surveyed data and numerical simulation of the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering 140(5): Article 04014018.

[46] Suppasri, A., I. Charvet, K. Imai, and F. Imamura. 2015a. Fragility curves based on data from the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami in Ishinomaki city with discussion of parameters influencing building damage Earthquake Spectra 31(2): 841–868.

[47] Suppasri A, Goto K, Muhari A, Ranasinghe P, Riyaz M, Affan M, Mas E, Yasuda M, Imamura F. A decade after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami – The progress in disaster preparedness and future challenges in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand and the Maldives. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 2015, 172(12): 3313-3341

[48] Suppasri, A., P. Latcharote, J.D. Bricker, N. Leelawat, A. Hayashi, K. Yamashita, F. Makinoshima, V. Roeber, and F. Imamura. 2016. Improvement of tsunami countermeasures based on lessons from the 2011 great east japan earthquake and tsunami – Situation after five years. Coastal Engineering Journal 58(4): Article 1640011.

[49] Suppasri A, Leelawat N, Latcharote P, Roeber V, Yamashita K, Hayashi A, Ohira H, Fukui K, Hisamatsu A, Nguyen D, Imamura F. The 2016 Fukushima Earthquake and Tsunami: Preliminary research and new considerations for tsunami disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2017, 21: 323-330

[50] Suppasri A, Fukui K, Yamashita K, Leelawat N, Hiroyuki O, Imamura F. Developing fragility functions for aquaculture rafts and eelgrass in the case of the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2018, 18(1): 145-155

[51] Suppasri A, Muhari A, Syamsidik R, Yunus K, Pakoksung F, Imamura S. Koshimura, Paulik R. Vulnerability characteristics of tsunamis in Indonesia: Analysis of the Global Centre for Disaster Statistics. Journal of Disaster Research, 2018, 13(6): 1039-1048

[52] Suppasri A, Pakoksung K, Charvet I, Chua CT, Takahashi N, Ornthammarath T, Latcharote P, Leelawat N, Imamura F. Load-resistance analysis: An alternative approach to tsunami damage assessment applied to the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2019, 19(8): 1807-1822

[53] Syamsidik Benazir, Luthfi M, Suppasri A, Comfort KL. The 22 December 2018 Mount Anak Krakatau Volcanogenic Tsunami on Sunda Strait Coasts, Indonesia: Tsunami and damage characteristics. Natural Hazard and Earth System Sciences, 2019, 20(2): 549-565

[54] Tanisho Y, Smith A, Murakami H. Post disaster mental health in Japan: Lessons and challenges, 2015, Tokyo: Health and Global Policy Institute

[55] Tozier de la Poterie A, Baudoin MA. From Yokohama to Sendai: Approaches to participation in international disaster risk reduction frameworks. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2015, 6(2): 128-139

[56] UNISDR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2005. Hyogo framework for action 2005–2015: Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. Geneva: UNISDR. https://www.unisdr.org/2005/wcdr/intergover/official-doc/L-docs/Hyogo-framework-for-action-english.pdf. Accessed 3 Apr 2020.

[57] UNISDR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2015. Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030, https://www.unisdr.org/files/43291_sendaiframeworkfordrren.pdf. Accessed 1 Dec 2019.

[58] UNDRR (UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2019. World tsunami awareness day. https://www.unisdr.org/tsunamiday. Accessed 18 Nov 2019.