World Congress on Risk 2015
19-23 July, 2015, Singapore
Session Schedule & Abstracts
* Disclaimer: All presentations represent the views of the authors, and not the organizations that support their research. Please apply the standard disclaimer that any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations in abstracts, posters, and presentations at the meeting are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other organization or agency. Meeting attendees and authors should be aware that this disclaimer is intended to apply to all abstracts contained in this document. Authors who wish to emphasize this disclaimer should do so in their presentation or poster. In an effort to make the abstracts as concise as possible and easy for meeting participants to read, the abstracts have been formatted such that they exclude references to papers, affiliations, and/or funding sources. Authors who wish to provide attendees with this information should do so in their presentation or poster.
Integrated Governance and Management for LPHC events: lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake
Room: Creation 13:30–15:00
|Chair(s): Kami Seo
1 Implementation Science as a part of Integrated Disaster Risk Governance and Management: Issue and challenges in Japan and Asia. Okada N (33)|
Abstract: The speaker intends to address the growing concern and need for integrated disaster risk management (IDRiM) with a dimension of governance to be further included. Such an extension is a real challenge for us all who have shared sense of mission from the viewpoint of risk analysis and management. Particularly this is the case of dealing with low-probability high consequence) disasters (and their risks) as evidenced, for instance by the 3.11 Eastern Japan Earthquake and Tsunami Disaster (2011). How to get our knowledge and action timely implemented before any catastrophic event occurs is precisely the most challenging issue for researchers and practitioners, local residents and communities, together with policy makers and decision makers.
Researchers engaged in risk management should take the challenge to address \"implementation issues\" by exploring this frontier area of risk science. The speaker proposes to call this pioneering science area \"Implementation Science.\" In fact a new academic community named \"International Society of Integrated Disaster Risk Management (IDRiM Society: http://idrim.org/ )\" has named it as \"Implementation Science (IMPS)\" and been exploring this new area as a complementary science to broaden the conventional research framework and perspectives. Especially over the last decade, .the author and others have been taking the initiative to adaptively develop IMPS, With a focus on Asia the following selected issues and research themes are highlighted with illustrations of ongoing actual field-based studies.
a)community-based participatory decision making for action development, b) action research into implementation research, c) \"doable\" disaster risk communication, and d) disaster risk governance of networked society.
In conclusion, with the above points made. the speaker plans to offer some basis for discussion and suggestions, and calls for collaborative challenge to trigger and disseminate the new research domain of IMPS.
2 Mass Relocations due to Disasters. Bier V (54)|
Abstract: The Japanese nuclear disaster and Hurricane Katrina both make clear that displaced persons can be a problem in the developed world, not only in the developing world. Large numbers of people may need to relocate for extended periods for reasons ranging from nuclear accidents to natural disasters to terrorism to climate change. Moreover, displaced persons who are not political refugees have few legal protections. This walk will: (1) highlight the fact that mass relocation can be a problem for the developed world; (2) review the impacts of such relocation events; (3) highlight characteristics that can lead relocation events to differ from each other; and (4) identify future research needs. The focus throughout is on the relocation, not on any physical damage. Disasters that require relocation can cause significant economic impacts due to business interruption and loss of housing, even if they do not cause extensive loss of life or property damage. Costs of relocation and disaster housing are typically among the largest impacts of a disaster. Unfortunately, disasters in populated areas can easily result in the need to relocate over a million people. Relocation events can differ significantly from each other. For example, consequences can be nonlinear in both the magnitude and the duration of relocation. It is also important to consider whether the relocation is due to a one-time chance event (such as a nuclear-power disaster or a terrorist attack), or a growing threat (e.g., flooding due to sea-level rise), and whether the area will eventually be repopulated, or remain uninhabitable. Costs also depend on the nature of the assets that are interdicted (e.g., loss of unique production capabilities). Finally, distributional effects are important, with increased housing prices causing hardship to low-income renters. Future research is thus important in better preparing for mass relocation.
3 Comparative Study on Sino-Japanese Post-disaster Reconstruction Process Based on Planning Perspective. Zhai G (34)|
Abstract: Both China and Japan are the countries with high frequency of earthquakes. Many cities suffered from devastating earthquake in the history. Since 2008, China has been attacked by Wenchuan earthquake and Yushu earthquake while Japan had ¬Āg3.11¬Āh Eastern Japan Earthquake occuring in 2011 which caused the explosion of Fukushima nuclear power plant. Therefore, it has been becoming more and more important how to improve urban resistance to earthquake, and paying more and more attentions to disaster reduction and prevention. Post-disaster reconstruction can be regarded as comprehensive reflection of social responses to disasters. China and Japan are neighbours but have different natural, socioeconomic and political settings. How the settings give impacts on the post-disaster reconstruction is the main purpose of this research.
This paper will apply a planning perspective to compare how the post-disaster reconstruction plans were made and implemented, and how the local residents of disaster-affected areas evaluated the reconstruction to obtain some findings on the process of post-disater reconstruction. The cases discussed here includes Wenchuan Earthquake in 2008, Yushu Earthquake in 2010, Kobe Earthquake in 1995 and Eastern Japan Earthquake in 2011.
The data and materials are obtained from a series of post-disaster plans, cased-related books, internet, field surveys and questionnaires and so on, covering whole process of plannig, implementation and post-reconstruction. We find there are some differences between China and Japan in organizational mechanism, the structure of administration system, the goals and focus of the plans, public participation, and the evaluation on the reconstruction. The findings may make some contributions to the urban disaster risk governance.
4 Scenario analysis of Japanese society after the 2011 disasters. Maeda Y (32)|
Abstract: The huge earthquake, tsunami and Fukushima nuclear plant accident in 2011 seriously damaged Japanese society. In addition, recovery from the disasters is related to a lot of risks. To cope with these risks, SRA-Japan established the special research committee of the 2011 disasters. Its research theme is a scenario analysis by Delphi method of risk in Japanese society after the 2011 earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear disaster. The respondents of the Delphi survey are the members of SRA-Japan. Firstly, the preliminary survey was done in 2011. Secondly, the first survey, in which comments about communities and industries in the affected area and the energy policy after the disaster were questioned, was operated in 2012. Thirdly, two scenarios, ¬Āewith nuclear energy¬Āf and ¬Āewithout nuclear energy¬Āf, were made. Fourthly, the evaluations and opinions about the two scenarios were investigated in the second survey in 2013.
As a result, we could found some consensual directions of the future, as well as differences in acceptance of nuclear energy policy. In other words, opinions about nuclear energy scenarios are dividend in pros and cons, while the consensual directions are found in the answers for the question about the risks for which Japanese society should enhance preparedness and the question about coming new types of disasters. For example, the pros and cons agreed about top five answers for the question, ¬ĀgWhat are risks that Japan should enhance preparedness in the future?¬Āh
On the other hand, answers of the ¬Āgwith¬Āh scenario supporters and the ¬Āgwithout¬Āh scenario supporters are different in the responses for the questions about residence¬Āfs acceptance of nuclear plants, coping with nuclear waste, progress of basic research of nuclear engineering, and nuclear fuel cycle technology. Following these results, the next survey to refine the scenarios and to investigate the factors determining the differences of responses of the risk analysts will be done.
5 Lessons for improving integrated LPHC risk governance and management: key questions for discussion. Goble R (37)|
Abstract: The Great East Japan Earthquake with its associated tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear accident was a one of a kind happening. Yet that experience and experience from other one of a kind disasters have much to teach us about preparing for and recovering from low probability high consequence (LPHC) events. Some lessons are general and familiar: planning for disasters should be wide reaching and integrative; effective communication is needed between experts of different specialties; stakeholder engagement is important. Though familiar, these objectives are not easily realized in the hard work of implementing recovery plans and designing and implementing preparations that might mitigate future disasters. Along with such general lessons, disaster experience speaks directly to specific tasks in design and implementation. The four previous papers in this session address several important aspects of the design and implementation work. These include 1) the concept and application of implementation science; 2) the spectrum of issues that arise in mass relocations, and opportunities for mitigating their impacts; 3) lessons that are revealed by comparisons between Chinese and Japanese post-disaster recovery efforts; 4) comparisons among Japanese experts in their perceptions of risk issues following the March 11, 2011 disaster and some implications of these comparisons. The two goals of this talk are to summarize key observations and lessons from the four talks and then to pose some questions derived from the observations and lessons; the intent is to open a productive discussion of the issues.
[back to schedule]