「Disaster Risk Management」カテゴリーアーカイブ

Day_201 : Ground conditions are a fundamental factor in determining the amplification of seismic motions at the ground surface and the magnitude of earthquake damage

The condition of the ground is an important factor in determining how strongly an earthquake will be felt. For example, in the 1891 Nobi earthquake (Japan), the 1923 Kanto earthquake (Japan), and the 1985 Mexico earthquake (Mexico), the softer the ground, the stronger the earthquake shaking. Especially in softer strata, seismic waves are slower, so the shaking is greater. This shaking is further intensified when the period of the strata coincides with the period of the earthquake or building. This is called resonance and is the cause of many building failures.

For example, in the 1891 Nobi Earthquake in Japan, most houses near the epicenter were destroyed, but the number of houses destroyed decreased as one moved farther away from the epicenter. At a distance of 50 km from the epicenter, few houses were broken in areas with hard ground, while many were broken in areas with soft ground; in the 1923 Kanto earthquake in Japan, few houses were broken on the Yamanote plateau in Tokyo, while many were broken in the Arakawa lowlands; in the 1985 Mexico earthquake, the collapse of tall buildings in particular was observed, but this was also caused by soft ground.

The destruction of homes by earthquakes has a major impact on human casualties, fires, and even society as a whole. Therefore, when considering earthquake countermeasures, it is very important to carefully examine the condition of the ground.

Source URL:https://dil.bosai.go.jp/workshop/2006workshop/gakusyukai19.html

Day_200 : High-Speed Tsunamis and Delayed Warnings: The Urgency of Evacuation during the 1896 Meiji Sanriku, 1933 Showa Sanriku, and 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunamis

Large tsunamis are caused by major earthquakes of magnitude 8 or greater. In particular, such earthquakes frequently occur along the Pacific coast of Hokkaido and Tohoku in Japan. The Sanriku coast in this region has a special shape called a “rias coast,” which is prone to tsunamis. In the 1896 Meiji Sanriku tsunami, the tsunami reached a height of 38 meters and killed about 22,000 people. Thirty-seven years later, in 1933, another major tsunami, the Showa Sanriku tsunami, struck the region, killing approximately 3,000 people. 2011’s Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami did not fully apply the lessons of the past, leaving approximately 18,000 people dead or missing.

The time between an earthquake and a tsunami reaching the coast is very short, from 5 to 10 minutes. Running to higher ground within this short time is almost the only way to protect yourself from a tsunami. The tsunami will reach the coast where it is the highest, and the tsunami will also reach the coast the fastest. Therefore, instead of waiting for information from the outside, it is important to have your own knowledge about tsunamis, understand your surroundings, and act on your own judgment.

Contents (in Japanese)
Source: URL:https://dil.bosai.go.jp/workshop/2006workshop/gakusyukai21.html

Day_196 : The Matsushiro Earthquake Center

The following is a reprint of a column I once wrote:

The Matsushiro Earthquake Center, nestled in the historic town of Matsushiro within Nagano Prefecture, represents a pivotal chapter in Japan’s approach to seismic research and disaster mitigation. Established in February 1967 under the auspices of the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Seismological Observatory, this institution was born out of a critical period marked by intense seismic activity. Between August 3, 1965, and April 17, 1966, the region experienced a staggering 6,780 seismic events, ranging from imperceptible tremors to significant quakes measuring intensity 5 and 4 on the Japanese scale. This unprecedented series of earthquakes not only posed a major societal challenge but also catalyzed the center’s founding.

The initiative to establish the center was strongly influenced by the then-mayor of Matsushiro, Nakamura, who famously prioritized the pursuit of knowledge and research over material wealth. This sentiment laid the groundwork for what would become a crucial site for earthquake prediction and disaster preparedness efforts, situated on the historical grounds of the Imperial Headquarters.

Drawing from my experience at the Natural Disaster Information Office and in collaboration with the Precise Earthquake Observation Office of the Japan Meteorological Agency (now known as the Matsushiro Earthquake Observatory), I have had the unique opportunity to organize and delve into discussions from that era. Despite being born after the seismic events in Matsushiro, I find the archival records fascinating. They not only recount the collective efforts of Matsushiro’s residents to forge a disaster-resilient community in the aftermath of the earthquake but also highlight the comprehensive nature of the research conducted.

The inquiries extended beyond seismic analysis, encompassing a holistic examination of the earthquake’s impact on the community. Noteworthy is the health survey conducted on students from a local school, in collaboration with the Matsushiro Health Center and hospital, to assess the psychological and physical effects of the seismic swarms. Moreover, the scope of investigation included studies on earthquake-induced landslides and the repercussions on water infrastructure, showcasing the multifaceted response from various experts and frontline workers of the time.

This rich tapestry of collective memory and scientific inquiry underscores the enduring spirit of Matsushiro—a community united in its commitment to disaster resilience, informed by the lessons of its past.

Ref.

http://researchmap.jp/read0139271/%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E3%83%96%E3%83%AD%E3%82%B0/

Day_195 : Scientists and Disaster Management Controversy issues with a L’Aquila Earthquake Case

The L’Aquila earthquake, which struck the Abruzzo region of Italy on April 6, 2009, was a significant case study for both scientists and disaster risk management professionals for several reasons. With a magnitude of 6.3, this earthquake caused extensive damage to the medieval city of L’Aquila, resulting in the deaths of more than 300 people, injuring over a thousand, and leaving tens of thousands of people homeless. Beyond the immediate physical damage and tragic loss of life, the L’Aquila earthquake raised important issues related to earthquake prediction, risk communication, and the responsibilities of scientists and authorities in disaster risk management.

Scientific Aspects and Controversies

The occurrence of earthquakes sparked a controversial debate over the ability to predict earthquakes and the communication of seismic risks to the public. Before the earthquake, a series of tremors were felt in the region, leading to heightened public concern. A week before the major earthquake, a meeting of the Major Risks Committee, which included government officials and scientists, was held to assess the situation. The committee concluded that it was not possible to predict whether a stronger earthquake would occur but reassured the public, suggesting a low likelihood of a major event. Unfortunately, the devastating earthquake struck shortly thereafter.

This situation has led to significant controversy, particularly regarding the role and communication strategies of scientists and government officials in disaster risk management. Critics argued that reassurances were misleading and contributed to a false sense of security among the population.

Legal and Ethical Issues

In a highly controversial decision, six Italian scientists and one government official were initially found guilty of manslaughter in 2012 for underestimating the risks and failing to adequately warn the population. This verdict was widely criticized by the international scientific community, which argued that it was unreasonable to expect scientists to accurately predict earthquakes. The verdict was largely overturned in 2014, with the convictions of scientists being annulled and the sentence of the government official being reduced.

Disaster Risk Management Implications

The L’Aquila earthquake underscored the importance of effective disaster-risk management and communication strategies. Key lessons include:

  1. Communication of Uncertainty: It highlighted the need for clear communication of scientific uncertainty to the public. Conveying the inherent uncertainties in earthquake prediction is crucial for helping individuals and communities make informed decisions about risk reduction and preparedness.
  2. Public Education and Preparedness: The tragedy reinforced the need for ongoing public education on disaster preparedness and the importance of building earthquake-resilient communities.
  3. Building Codes and Urban Planning: Ensuring strict adherence to earthquake-resistant building codes and urban planning practices is vital in reducing the vulnerability of buildings and infrastructure.
  4. Multi-disciplinary Approach: The event demonstrated the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach that includes not only seismologists but also engineers, urban planners, emergency management professionals, and policymakers in disaster risk management planning and response.
  5. Ethical Responsibilities: The aftermath raised questions about the ethical responsibilities of scientists and the balance between preventing public panic and ensuring preparedness.

The L’Aquila earthquake remains a case study of the complex interplay among science, policy, ethics, and public communication in the context of natural disaster risk management.

Day_185:TImeline for Disaster Management

I wanted to share with you a brief overview of the timeline for disaster management. As someone with extensive experience in this field, I believe integrating this timeline with empirical insights from past disasters could further enhance the effectiveness of disaster management strategies.The timeline consists of four main phases: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery, based on the disaster management cycle. Mitigation focuses on reducing the impact of disasters through long-term measures. Preparedness involves planning and preparing to respond to a disaster. The response phase is activated when a disaster occurs, and the recovery phase focuses on restoring the affected community.Implementing the timeline requires collaboration and coordination, community involvement, and continuous improvement. By understanding and utilizing this timeline, disaster management professionals can effectively plan for and respond to disasters, ultimately reducing their impact on communities.

A timeline for disaster management typically outlines the chronological steps and phases involved in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from disasters. This timeline can be crucial for organizations, governments, and communities to manage the impacts of disasters efficiently. The timeline usually spans before, during, and after a disaster occurs and is divided into four main phases: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Here’s a brief overview:

1. Mitigation
Mitigation involves efforts to reduce the impact of disasters. This phase includes long-term measures aimed at minimizing or altogether avoiding the effects of disasters. Examples include building dams or levees to prevent flooding, enforcing building codes to withstand earthquakes, and implementing fire management strategies in wildfire-prone areas.

How to use:
Implement building and infrastructure standards that can withstand natural disasters.
Conduct environmental assessments and hazard analyses to identify risks and vulnerabilities.
Develop and enforce land-use policies that consider hazard-prone areas.

2. Preparedness
Preparedness focuses on planning and preparing to respond to a disaster. This phase involves training, exercises, establishing emergency plans, stocking supplies, and ensuring communication systems are in place.

How to use:
Conduct drills and exercises for emergency services and the public.
Develop and disseminate emergency plans, including evacuation routes and shelter locations.
Educate the community about disaster risks and how to prepare for them.

3. Response
The response phase is activated when a disaster occurs. It includes immediate actions taken to ensure safety, such as search and rescue operations, providing emergency services, and offering immediate relief to affected individuals.

How to use:
Activate emergency operations centers and disaster response plans.
Deploy emergency services and first responders to the affected areas.
provide emergency communications and information to the public.

4. Recovery
Recovery involves restoring the affected community to normal or better conditions. This phase can be short-term, focusing on immediate needs, or long-term, focusing on rebuilding and rehabilitation.

How to use:
Assess the damage and prioritize recovery efforts.
Support affected individuals and communities through rebuilding and financial assistance programs.
Review and revise disaster management plans based on lessons learned.

Implementing the Timeline
Collaboration and Coordination: Work with local, national, and international bodies to share information and resources.
Community Involvement: Engage the community in all phases to ensure that disaster management efforts are inclusive and meet the needs of all affected populations.
Continuous Improvement: Regularly review and update disaster management plans based on new information, technologies, and lessons learned from past events.

By understanding and utilizing this timeline, disaster management professionals can effectively plan for and respond to disasters, ultimately reducing their impact on communities.

A timeline can be derived from the disaster management cycle. The precise timetable for community disaster management is more specific, with intervals of two days, one day, three hours, during the disaster, and so forth.

In reference to:

What is the disaster management cycle?

What Is a Disaster Management Cycle?

 

Day_182: The Prospects of “Natural” Disasters and Worldwide Readiness

Various strategies can be implemented to alleviate the impact of natural calamities. These encompass measures for reducing the impact of disasters, such as enhancing the ability of infrastructure to withstand damage, establishing systems that provide advance notice of potential disasters, and fostering education and knowledge about disasters.
Furthermore, implementing sustainable development strategies can also contribute to the mitigation of susceptibility to catastrophes. This includes the safeguarding and rejuvenation of natural ecosystems, which can function as innate safeguards against calamities.
The trajectory of natural calamities remains unpredictable. As climate change intensifies, we can anticipate a rise in the frequency and intensity of weather-related catastrophes. Nevertheless, by enhancing comprehension and preparedness we may alleviate their effects and construct a more robust environment.
Addressing natural disasters necessitates a synchronized, worldwide effort due to their global nature. Through comprehending the origins and consequences of disasters, as well as applying efficient solutions for disaster management, we may mitigate the effects and guarantee a more secure and adaptable future for everyone.

Day_176: Empowering Pacific Island Countries: Innovative Strategies for a Disaster-Resilient Future

 

Let’s learn about disaster risk reduction in Pacific Island countries.

For Pacific Island countries (PICs), which are vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters, including tropical cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis, and volcanic eruptions, disaster risk reduction (DRR) is a crucial part of sustainable development. These occurrences could severely impact the environment, the local economy, and the local communities. It is now more crucial than ever for PICs to concentrate on improving their capacity for disaster risk reduction and resilience.

The concept and practice of disaster risk reduction (DRR) are described by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) as “the concept and practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events.” This entails comprehending the particular difficulties that PICs confront in the Pacific region, figuring out the best ways to deal with these difficulties, and cooperating to secure a more resilient future for everyone.

This article discusses how crucial disaster risk reduction is for the Pacific region, looks at essential tactics for improving DRR, looks at examples of effective programs, and thinks about how local knowledge and global cooperation may help create a resilient culture. Pacific Island countries may lessen their susceptibility, promote sustainable development, and be better prepared for future calamities by implementing these measures.

Pacific Island countries face distinct challenges that are unique to their region.

Pacific Island countries have many specific difficulties when it comes to reducing the risk of disasters. First and foremost, they are particularly vulnerable to disasters because of their location. PICs are vulnerable to volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and tsunamis because of their location along the Pacific Ring of Fire. The area is also frequently affected by tropical cyclones, which can result in extensive harm and destruction.

PICs’ low resources, disaster preparedness, and response capacity present another critical obstacle. Many of these nations’ inhabitants, infrastructure, and financial resources are modest. As a result, they frequently struggle to create and keep up with the required structures and methods for efficient disaster risk reduction.

Additionally, the effects of climate change are increasing already-existing threats and developing new ones for Pacific Island nations. Natural disasters are becoming more frequent and severe in the area due to rising sea levels, rising temperatures, and altering weather patterns. This makes improving disaster risk reduction in the Pacific much more complex and urgent.

Reducing the risk of disasters in the Pacific region is paramount.

It is impossible to exaggerate the significance of disaster risk reduction in the region of the Pacific. Natural disasters can wreak havoc and create great destruction, affecting the environment, the economy, and communities that persist for years. The Pacific island countries can lessen these effects, save lives, and safeguard their development achievements by investing in disaster risk reduction.

The Pacific region’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are also strongly related to disaster risk reduction. Natural disasters can directly influence many SDGs, including eradicating poverty, ensuring health and well-being, and fostering sustainable cities and communities. Pacific Island countries may advance toward these objectives and guarantee a more sustainable future for all by improving their capacity for disaster risk reduction.

Finally, reducing the risk of disasters is essential to helping Pacific Island communities become resilient. Communities’ capacity to resist shocks and pressures like disasters, recover from them, and adapt to them is called resilience. By implementing efficient disaster risk reduction initiatives, PICs may empower their communities to increase their resilience and preparedness for future catastrophes.

Discover some highly effective techniques to enhance disaster risk reduction with the following suggestions:.

Climate change adaptation

The effects of climate change are one of the biggest obstacles to disaster risk reduction that Pacific Island countries must overcome. As a result, any DRR strategy in the area must include adaptation to climate change as a critical element. Some examples of adaptation methods are enhancing coastal defenses, implementing sustainable land- and water-management practices, and creating climate-resilient agriculture and fisheries.

Climate factors must be incorporated into development planning and decision-making processes as part of climate change adaptation. This can help ensure that investments and development initiatives are created to resist climate change’s effects and not unintentionally raise the risk of disaster.

Infrastructure resilience

Improving infrastructure resilience is crucial for boosting disaster risk reduction in the Pacific. This entails ensuring that critical infrastructure, such as transportation networks, energy production facilities, and water and sanitation systems, is planned, constructed, and maintained to withstand the effects of natural disasters and climate change.

Developing and enforcing construction rules and standards, using cutting-edge technologies and materials, and integrating risk assessments and management strategies into the planning and design processes for infrastructure are all ways to increase its resilience. Pacific Island countries can lessen the potential harm brought on by disasters and assure the ongoing provision of critical services both during and after disasters by investing in resilient infrastructure.

Early warning systems

Implementing efficient early warning systems is paramount in enhancing disaster risk reduction efforts in the Pacific region. The aforementioned systems can provide precise and prompt data regarding imminent perils, enabling communities and governing bodies to undertake suitable measures to mitigate the consequences of disasters.

Early warning systems encompass a variety of technologies and methodologies, including but not limited to satellite-based monitoring, seismometers, and community-based observation networks. Apart from the development and execution of stated systems, it is crucial to guarantee that communities possess the ability and knowledge to understand and respond to early warning information.

Community engagement and Preparedness

Any practical disaster risk reduction approach must include community involvement and preparedness. Pacific Island countries may ensure that local needs and views are considered and that communities have a greater capacity to respond to and recover from disasters by involving communities in designing, implementing, and monitoring DRR programs.

Creating community early warning systems and carrying out of regular disaster exercises are examples of community-based disaster preparedness initiatives. Additionally, community participation can increase the efficacy and support for DRR activities by fostering trust between citizens and authorities.

Case studies of successful disaster risk reduction initiatives

The successful implementation of various disaster risk reduction efforts in Pacific Island countries has shed light on practical methods for strengthening DRR in the area. The Pacific Catastrophe Risk Assessment and finance project (PCRAFI), which emerged in response to the expanding demand for disaster risk finance in the Pacific, is one such project.

Participating countries have access to catastrophe risk models, financial safety nets, and technical assistance for disaster risk management through PCRAFI. With the tools and resources it offers, the project has proven to be a highly successful means of assisting Pacific Island countries to identify and manage their disaster risk.

The Pacific Climate Change and Migration (PCCM) project, which intends to raise the resilience of vulnerable populations in Fiji and Tuvalu to the effects of climate change, including displacement and migration, is another effective program. The project has concentrated on a variety of interventions, such as the building of climate-resilient infrastructure, the promotion of community-based disaster risk reduction, and the development of sustainable methods for livelihood.

The PCCM project highlights the value of tackling the underlying factors that increase disaster risk, such as climate change and incorporating disaster risk reduction (DRR) into larger development projects. Pacific Island countries may create more resilient and sustainable populations by approaching disaster risk reduction strategically.

The Role of international cooperation in disaster risk reduction

Effective disaster risk reduction in the Pacific region requires global cooperation. International cooperation and support are crucial because many Pacific Island countries lack the resources and capacity to manage their disaster risk independently.

International cooperation can take many forms, including knowledge sharing, capacity building, and financial and technical support. For instance, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has generously supported initiatives in the Pacific to reduce disaster risk, such as creating early warning systems, establishing community-based disaster preparedness programs, and promoting climate change adaptation.

Incorporating regional expertise and customs into DRR activities can be significantly aided by international cooperation. International partners can contribute to ensuring that DRR strategies are practical and culturally appropriate by collaborating closely with local communities and traditional leaders.

Incorporating local knowledge and traditional practices

Initiatives for reducing the risk of disaster must incorporate local expertise and customs to be effective and long-lasting. The inhabitants of the Pacific Islands have abundant knowledge and experience in dealing with natural disasters, and their customs and traditions can offer essential insights into efficient DRR techniques.

Many Pacific Island societies, for instance, have created complex early warning systems using their understanding of the environment and natural occurrences. Countries in the Pacific Islands can improve their capacity for disaster preparedness and response by integrating these systems into more comprehensive DRR policies.

Culturing climate-resilient crops and constructing cyclone-resistant homes are examples of traditional practices that can offer important insights into effective adaptation strategies. Pacific Islander countries may create more resilient and sustainable communities by recognizing and adopting these practices into DRR projects.

Building a Culture of Resilience in Pacific Island Communities

Effective disaster risk reduction in Pacific Island communities depends on fostering a culture of resilience. This entails implementing efficient DRR measures and giving communities the tools they need to manage their risk of disasters and increase their resilience.

Communities can be empowered to actively participate in disaster preparedness and response through community-based approaches to disaster risk reduction, such as those used in the PCCM project. These techniques can also assist in fostering trust and collaboration between communities and authorities.

Furthermore, building a culture of resilience in Pacific Island communities can be facilitated by raising awareness and educating people about disaster risk reduction. Pacific Island countries may create more resilient communities and lessen the potential effect of natural disasters by giving populations the expertise and skills they need to understand and handle their disaster risk.

Monitoring and evaluating disaster risk reduction progress

Monitoring and assessing their progress is crucial for disaster risk reduction strategies to be effective and persistent. Pacific Island countries can continuously hone and enhance their DRR strategies, enhancing their capacity for resilience over time by monitoring progress and identifying areas for improvement.

The development of data management systems, setting up surveys and evaluations, and establishing performance indicators are just a few examples of the various ways that monitoring and evaluation can be carried out. Pacific Island governments may ensure that their DRR projects are based on evidence and successful by investing in these tools and procedures.

Envisioning a Robust and Sustainable Future for Pacific Island Nations through Collaborative Endeavors and Holistic Strategies

It takes a variety of tactics and approaches to effectively increase disaster risk reduction in Pacific Island countries. Pacific Island countries may build a more robust future for all people by emphasizing infrastructure resilience, early warning systems, community participation and preparedness, and incorporating indigenous knowledge and traditional practices.

Effective disaster risk reduction in the Pacific requires global cooperation and encouraging a resilient culture. Pacific Island nations can lessen their susceptibility to natural disasters and promote sustainable development by cooperating and strengthening local populations.

Monitoring and evaluation will be crucial to ensuring that DRR projects in the area are successful and long-lasting. By continuously enhancing and upgrading our methods, we can create a more resilient and prosperous future for Pacific Island nations and their populations.

Day_168 : Past Interview Records – PTWC (Pacific Tsunami Warning Center) in Hawaii (1)

Continue to the past New Orleans Interview Records, I would like to open the memo about the interview to PTWC. It was a great time and I learned a lot from the interviews.  So I would like to share the fact to let you know their works to tackle the tsunami disasters in the world.

PTWC is the core center for the tsunami warning well known to the world.

2008.2.26 (Tue.)　at 1000 am
15 staff, director, deputy director
Information Technician, including nine scientists
16-hour shift on 8-4-4, homes are next to the center

The records from the interview survey are shown below.

■ Evacuation
There is no international standard in terminology. Terminology varies by country/region. The words sometimes make me confused. Also, in the past, it was two either evacuation nor no evacuation.

■ Warning Error
It is challenging to give a warning. There are errors in the original earthquake and the tide data. There is an error in the gauge also.
To judge them collect is too hard. So, it can be said that 99.99% is an error.

In Hawaii, only a quarter of evacuation was actually damaged in the past. It is not unusual that although there were evacuations, there were no damages at all.

■ Past data and warning judgment
Only use a few. Because how to put out the past data, equipment, etc.are hard to do. Which way is the numerical model used to determine if the earthquake becomes a tsunami is complicated. There are more things to do.

■ Relationship with other countries
The countries that are most focused on warning about tsunami in the Pacific are Japan, America, Australia, Chile, Canada, and Russia. Also, it is not possible to evaluate the inspection records of other countries. This should be noted.

■ At the time of the 2004 tsunami
Most of the records before the Indian Ocean Tsunami were reported hourly, so judge the event was tough. Every 15 minutes, now every 6 minutes is normal and very good.

■ Conditions for cancellation
Make a comprehensive decision. The problem of reflections adds to the complexity. Not only direct waves but also an indirect wave should be considered.

Day_165: Capacity, Coping Capacity, and Capacity Assessment

Based on the UNDRR, capacity, coping capacity, and capacity assessment are defined as follows:

Capacity is “the combination of all the strengths, attributes and resources available within an organization, community or society to manage and reduce disaster risks and strengthen resilience.” and also annotated, “capacity may include infrastructure, institutions, human knowledge and skills, and collective attributes such as social relationships, leadership and management”

Coping capacity is “the ability of people, organizations and systems, using available skills and resources, to manage adverse conditions, risk or disasters. The capacity to cope requires continuing awareness, resources and good management, both in normal times as well as during disasters or adverse conditions. Coping capacities contribute to the reduction of disaster risks.”

Capacity assessment is “the process by which the capacity of a group, organization or society is reviewed against desired goals, where existing capacities are identified for maintenance or strengthening and capacity gaps are identified for further action.”

We consider the capacity as a part of the vulnerability mentioned in the Press and Release (PAR) model. The capacity is examined as a coping capacity in the context of the disaster.

This means capacity is more changing, human-centered, government-related, and has timely measurement aspects compared to the other vulnerability factors.

As mentioned above, capacity is considered one of the vulnerability factors, and the vulnerability index can be analyzed based on the statistical data. However, the applicable capacity statistical data is difficult to determine and also difficult to obtain in Thailand. In addition, capacity cannot be measured well by the statistical data. They could be greatly influenced by social networks, past experience, and other factors. With this situation, the capacity assessment can be utilized not only to measure social vulnerability but also to visualize the risk by overlapping with hazard risk on the GIS. Also, capacity can be considered to be the key to examining resilience.

Day_162: Disaster Links Library

As mentioned below, the Disaster Links Library has been created. The first draft is attached to this menu as “Disaster Links Library”. There are still many challenges ahead, however, the page will be completed step by step with adding more info.

If you have some excellent links, please let me know.

https://disasterresearchnotes.site/archives/3793

sponsored link