Earthquake」カテゴリーアーカイブ

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 this fact to let you know their efforts to tackle the tsunami disasters in the world.

PTWC is the core center for tsunami warning and is 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 either an evacuation or 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 is too hard. So, it can be said that 99.99% is an error.

In Hawaii, only a quarter of evacuation were 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. is hard to do. 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 indirect waves should be considered.

Day_156: Matsushiro Earthquake Center

I will update a column of the NIED e-mail magazine which I wrote a long time ago because the content is not faded with time. (I will do this step by step in Japanese and English.) I will also add comments to update the situation.

Published April 5, 2010
NIED-DIL e-mail magazine: Matsushiro Earthquake Center

■ Matsushiro Earthquake Center ■

There is an organization called Matsushiro Earthquake Center in Matsushiro, Nagano Prefecture, Japan. The Center was established in February 1967 at the Japan Meteorological Agency in Matsushiro Town, Nagano Prefecture (now Nagano City), based on the Matsushiro Seismological Observatory, which was established in 1947. The background of this establishment is that between August 3, 1965, and April 17, 1966, insensitive earthquakes with seismic intensities 5 and 4 were observed three times each and a total of 6,780 earthquakes were detected in the Matsushiro town area. This severe earthquake activity has become a major social problem.

It is famous that Mayor Nakamura at that time said that he wanted to learn and research more than things and money, and that was the starting point of the center. The center is also well known as the location where was planned to build the imperial general headquarters at the end of the second world war. Besides, It is known that the experience gained from the observation of the earthquake has dramatically influenced the progress of earthquake prediction and disaster countermeasures today.

The author is organizing the records of the discourse at the time with the cooperation of the Japan Meteorological Agency’s Earthquake Observatory (Matsushiro Seismological Observatory) as the Disaster Information Office. I am surprised at the fascinating records. The fact that Matsushiro city was working to build a disaster-resilient town in the wake of an earthquake throughout the city is well communicated. For example, there was not only research on the earthquake itself but also research on the health status of students, including psychological aspects from nearby schools caused by a swarm. This was due to the cooperation of Matsushiro health centers and hospitals. It does not stop there. Members were active in the front lines of various fields at the time, such as landslide surveys caused by earthquakes and the impact on water supply facilities during earthquakes, reports from various perspectives.

I am sorry that the format, etc. is still insufficient, but I am starting to release these records on the HP in hopes that you can see it in a provisional form. Please see if you have time.

URL: http://dil.bosai.go.jp/library/matsushiro/MRecord.html

Now you can not access it, but you can ask NIED DIL for information.

Published on April 5, 2010

Matsushiro Seismological Observatory
https://www.data.jma.go.jp/svd/eqev/data/matsushiro/en/index.html

Day_154 : (In Japanese) 災害からの復興

かなり前に書いたメールマガジンのコラムですが、内容は、色あせていないので、復習を兼ねて、これから数回にわたり掲載致します。(同様に英語版も順番に掲載していきます。)

2010年3月5日発行
再掲NIED-DILメールマガジン:2回】災害からの復興
□■災害からの復興■□
ハイチの大地震で復興はどのようになるのか、世界の注目は集まっています。
これまで復興についていろいろと調べましたが、考える指針の有効な理論とし
てハースという研究者らの「急速に成長しつつある都市は、被災後急速に復興
するであろうが、変化せず停滞し、あるいは下り坂にある都市は、被災後きわ
めて緩慢に復旧するか、あるいは急激に衰えていくであろう」(1977)があり
ます。この場合の成長する都市とはどういう地域かを考えた際、災害前の人口
の増加が結構指標として使えるのではないかと考えられます。実際、いろいろ
と調べたのですが、災害がどれだけ大きなものであっても、人口が増加傾向に
あった地域は、復興しやすいのではないかという予測です。例えば、伊勢湾台
風災害による名古屋市では、経済・社会的な災害の規模が大きく援助量が少な
かったのですが、一年とたたないぐらいあっという間に復興したといえる状況
になりました。比べて、ハリケーン・カトリーナ災害によるニューオリンズで
は、経済・社会的な災害規模としては、実はそれほど大きくなかったのですが、
援助量は膨大でした。にもかかわらず5年たとうとしているのに、復興はまだ
ままならないといってよい状態かもしれません。ニューオリンズは災害前から
人口の減少が著しく、サバイバルな都市とさえ言われていました。インド洋大
津波の被災地の復興についても、ここでははっきりといえませんが、同様な傾
向が多く見うけられます。
さて、ハイチの例に戻って考えてみます。ハイチ(ポルトープランス)の人
口増加率を調べてみると、災害前まで急速に増えていたことがわかりました。
人口という指標だけで考えるとハイチの復興は比較的早く成し遂げられるはず
ということになります。しかしながらハイチには上記の例では当てはめて考え
ることができない全く異なる社会状況が存在するとも考えられます。そのため
ハイチの復興は、政治の舵取りや社会状況という非常にわかり難い変数に大き
く左右されると考えなければならないのかもしれません。雑誌「エコノミス
ト」には、インド洋で起こった義援金や援助の問題、偏ったところに過剰に供
給され被害が拡大した事例など、と同様な問題がハイチでも起こるのではない
かと危惧する記事がありました。
皆さんはハイチの復興をどう考えますか。

2010年3月5日発行

Day_152 : (In Japanese) 災害による報告死者数

かなり前に書いたメールマガジンのコラムですが、内容は、色あせていないので、復習を兼ねて、これから数回にわたり掲載致します。(同様に英語版も順番に掲載していきます。)

2010年2月4日発行
再掲NIED-DILメールマガジン:1回】災害による報告死者数
■災害による報告死者数■

1月12日ハイチで大きな地震がありました。その影響は、現在でも大きな社会問題ともなっていますが、初期の段階で大統領が20万人の犠牲者が出ていると宣言しました。

2005年8月末のハリケーン・カトリーナ災害のときは、最初1万人との報道がなされましたが、最終的に1千3百人ぐらいになりました。死者が少ないのに越したことはありませんが、日本と比べてお国柄がこのようなところにもでるのかと感じます。

日本の場合で典型的な事例は、阪神・淡路大震災の時です。当時筆者は京都に住んでおり、京都市内で働いておりましたが、大きなゆれのあと、朝7時ごろは、死者の数がまだ数人だったとTVなどで報道されていたのを覚えています。それが時間が経つにつれて、数百人、数千人と時間が経つごとに増えていきました。

アメリカは、トップダウンで戦略的、日本は、ボトムアップで正確さ重視、そんな感じがします。2004年のインド洋津波では、周辺諸国の報告死者数が上下していましたが、この点をとっただけでも、災害がその国の経済や社会状況を浮き彫りにする一端が見えてきます。

ハイチに関しては時を追うごとに報告死者数が増えておりその状況が心配されます。初期の段階の大統領の宣言どおりの数字にならないことを祈ります。

2010年2月4日発行

P.S.

例えば下記のワールドビジョンのHPでは、現在の推定死者を、250,000人としています。つまり、最初の報告は最終的には、ある意味的を得ていたことになってしまいました。

https://www.worldvision.org/disaster-relief-news-stories/2010-haiti-earthquake-facts

Day_143 : World Disaster Chronology 1996-1997

Date Place Disaster Type Situations
1996.01- US, East Cold Wave Over 200(DM) Snowstorm
1996.02.17 Indonesia, East (Irian Jaya) Submarine Earthquake M8.1~8.2, 170(DM) Tsunami to Pulau Biak
1996.04- Mongolia Bush Fire The worst bush fire in Mongolia’s  history.
1996.05- Bangladesh Tornado 1,000-1,500(DM) One of the worst tornado disaster in the world
1996.05- Tanzania Strong Wind Over 500(DM)
1996.05- Pakistan Heat Wave Over100(D)
1996.06- China Heavy rain, Flood Over 220(DM), Landslide
1996.06- China, South Heavy rain, Flood Over 1,700(D)
1996.07- China Typhoon, Flood Over500(DM)
1996.07- India Heavy rain, Flood Over750(DM)
1996.07- North Korea Heavy rain, Flood DM(several hundred), Estimated large-scale starving caused by two years successive floods.
1996.07- Nepal Heavy rain, Flood Over210(DM)
1996.09- Japan Typhoon, Flood 11(D), Injured 70 ,Destroyed 900, Inundated over12,000
1996.11- India Cyclone, Flood Over 2,000(DM)
1996.12- Malaysia Typhoon, Flood 200(DM)
1997.01- Madagascar Cyclone, Flood 100(DM)
1997.02- Peru Heavy rain, Floods, and Landslides Over380(DM)
1997.02.28 Iran, Northwest Inland Earthquake M5.5-6.1, 965-1,100 (DM) *
1997.05.10 Iran, East Inland Earthquake M6.8-7.3, 1,600(DM)*
1997.05- Bangladesh Typhoon, Flood Over500(DM)
1997.06- China, Sichuan Heavy rain, Flood, and Landslide 140(DM)
1997.07.09 Venezuela Inland Earthquake M6.9、Over76(DM)
1997.07- Germany/Poland, North Heavy rain, Flood 110(DM) Oder river flooding
1997.08- Japan Heavy rain, Flood 5(D),Inundated Over 14,000
1997.08- China Typhoon, Flood 140(DM)
1997.08- India, North Heavy rain, Flood, and Landslide 130-280(DM)
1997.08- India Tidal wave 400(DM)
1997.09- Japan Typhoon, Flood 12(D), Destroyed approx.200, Inundated over 16,000
1997.09- Pakistan Heavy rain, Flood Over 140(DM), Lahore
1997.10- Mexico Hurricane, Flood Over 400(DM)
1997.10- Somalia Heavy rain, Flood Over 1,700(D)
1997.11- Ecuador Heavy rain, Flood Over 140(DM)
1997.12- Peru Heavy rain, Flood Over 300(D)
1997.12- Brazil and others Forest fire Amazon rainforest conflagration
1997.12- Zambia Heavy rain, Flood Over 200(DM)
1998.02.04 Afghanistan, Northeast Inland Earthquake M5.9-6.1,  2,300(DM)
1998.03- Pakistan Heavy rain, Flood Over300(DM)
1998.03- India Tornado Over 200(DM)
1998.05.31 Afghanistan, Northeast Inland Earthquake M6.6-6.9, 4,000-5,000(DM)
1998.05- India Heat Wave Over 3,000(D)
1998.05- Italy Heavy rain, Flood 180-300(DM)
1998.06- India Typhoon, Flood 1,000(DM)
1998.06- Nepal Heavy rain, Flood Over 110(DM)
1998.06- China Heavy rain, Flood Over 4,200(DM) Yangtze river and other rivers floods, over 200 million (affected)
1998.07- US, South Heat Wave Over 170(DM)
1998.07- India/Bangladesh Heavy rain, Flood Over 3,000(DM) Ganges River flood
1998.07- Uzbekistan Heavy rain, Flood Over 700(DM), a dam was collapsed
1998.07.17 New Guinea, North Submarine Earthquake New Guinea Earthquake and Tsunami M7.1  2,800(DM)
1998.08- South Korea Heavy rain, Flood 250-330(DM)
1998.08- Japan Heavy rain, Flood 25(DM), Destroyed approx.480, Inundation over 13,000
1998.09- Japan Typhoon, Flood 18(DM), Injured 570, Destroyed approx.21,000, Inundation over 8,600, Typhoon No.7,8
1998.09- Japan Typhoon, Flood 9(D), Destroyed approx.100, Inundation over 17,000, Typhoon No.9
1998.09- Japan Typhoon, Flood 14(DM), Injured 60, Destroyed approx.700, Inundation over 12,000, Typhoon No.10
1998.09- Haiti Dominica Typhoon, Flood Over 500(DM), Hurricane George
1998.09- Mexico Heavy rain, Flood Over 1,400(DM)
1998.10- Nicaragua Volcano Over 1,600(DM) Mudslide
1998.11- Thailand Typhoon, Flood 100(DM)
1998.11.29 Eastern Indonesia (Serum Sea) Submarine Earthquake M7.7-8.3  40(DM) Tsunami

* Iran has a lot of earthquake disasters. The below can be referred.

https://disasterresearchnotes.site/archives/2801

This world disaster chronology is a draft version.  It will be combined with other years and polished later.

Day_142 : World Disaster Chronology-1994-1995

 

Date Place Disaster Type Situations
1994.01.17 US, Southeastern Inland Earthquake 1994 Northridge earthquake *
M6.8, 60(D), one of the costliest natural disasters of US history
1994.02.15 Indonesia, West (Sumatra Island) Inland Earthquake M6.6~7.0, Over 200(DM)
1994.05- Bangladesh Cyclone Over 170 (DM)
1994.05.13 Afghanistan Inland Earthquake M6.0, Over160(DM)
1994.06- India / Pakistan Heat Wave Over 400 (D)
1994.06- Ethiopia Drought Over 5,000(D), Food shortage
1994.06- China, Central eastern Heavy Rain, Flood Over 700(DM), A part of Shanghai was inundated
1994.06.02 Indonesia, South (Java Island) Submarine Earthquake M7.8、死不270以上、津波。
1994.06.06 Colombia, South Inland Earthquake M6.6, 300-800(DM), Debris flow
1994.06.09 Bolivia, Peru Deep-focus Earthquake 1994 Bolivia earthquake M8.2 10(D)
1994.07- Rwanda Heat Wave Over 10,000(D), combined with Civil War
1994.08.18 Algeria, North Inland Earthquake M5.7, Over 150(DM)
1994.10.04 Japan, Kunashiri Island Submarine Earthquake The 1994 Hokkaido Toho Oki Earthquake M8.2-8.3, 15(DM), Tsunami
1994.11- India South Cyclone 190(DM)
1994.11.14 The Philippines Inland Earthquake M7.1 Over70(DM) Tsunami
1994.11- Italy Heavy Rain, Flood Over 60(DM)
1994.11- Egypt Lightning 560(DM) Lightning damage to Oil facilities
1994.11- Haiti, Cuba Hurricane, Flood Over 700(DM)
1995.01.17 Japan Inland Earthquake The 1995 Great Hanshin Awaji Earthquake * M6.9~7.3 5,500~6,400(DM)
1995.03- Afghanistan Heavy Rain, Flood, Landslide Over 360(DM)
1995.04- Bangladesh Strong Wind 700(DM)
1995.05.27 Sakhalin, North Inland Earthquake The 1995 Neftegorsk earthquake,M7.1~7.5, Over 1,989(DM) Neftegorsk city was destroyed and vanished from the map after the disaster
1995.05- Brazil Heavy rain, Flood. Landslide Over 80(DM)
1995.05- China Heavy rain, Flood Over 1,100(DM), Yangtze river flood
1995.06- India, Pakistan Heat Wave Over 800(D)
1995.06- Japan Heavy rain, Flood 9(DM), Destroyed Approx.200, Inundated over15,000
1995.07- US Heat Wave Over 800(D)
1995.07- D.P.R.Korea Heavy rain, Flood Over 60(DM)
1995.07- Thailand Heavy rain, Flood Over 200(DM)
1995.08- Morocco Heavy rain, Flood Over 150(DM)
1995.9- The Philippines Heavy rain, Flood Over 540(DM)
1995.11- The Philippines Typhoon, Flood Over 780(DM)
1995.12-  Kazakhstan Cold Wave Over 100(DM) Snowstorm

D: The number of Death M: Missing number DM: The dead and missing number

https://disasterresearchnotes.site/archives/2831

Related articles across the web

Day_131 : Italy-Recent earthquake and past earthquake disasters (2)

CNN: (October 30)A powerful 6.6-magnitude earthquake rocked central Italy on Sunday morning, injuring at least 20 people, in the strongest tremor to hit the country in more than three decades. The earthquake follows tremors last week and comes on the heels of a devastating quake in August, which killed nearly 300 people and flattened entire villages.

Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) still does not list this earthquake situation.This earthquake is severer than this August Earthquake(Day_107). Earthquakes in Italy happened mostly central and southern part of Italy around the

http://disasters.weblike.jp/disasters/archives/3081

Natural disaster trends are usually from human sufferings to economic damage. In Italy, main natural disaster is the earthquake and follow the trends as you can confirm below.
However, recent earthquake disasters in Italy are so severe.  With this August earthquake, the number of casualties would be over 550. The disaster recovery is also the issue. As mentioned in Day_107, “Italy has a poor record of rebuilding after quakes. About 8,300 people who were forced to leave their houses after a deadly earthquake in L’Aquila in 2009 are still living in temporary accommodation(Reuters).”

Table 1 and Table 2 show the 1900-2016 top 10 deadliest and costliest disasters in Italy (EM-DAT).

Table 1  Totals deaths
Italy deadliest

Table 2  Total damage
Italy costliest disasters

Day_130 : Natural Disasters in China (2) – Two Earthquake Disasters

 

Two Earthquakes
Yang Zhang William Drake, et al. (2016)* indicates interesting views on two earthquakes disaster recoveries, the 1976 Tangshan earthquake and the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake. The point is, why the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake recovery was so rapid compared to the 1976’s earthquake.
However, the paper could add more about the total background changes of China such as society, economy, and politics. The china has changed dramatically after the 1976 from historical viewpoints.

The Tangshan earthquake is one of the deadliest disasters in the world and the Wenchuan earthquake is one of the top ten costliest disasters in the world also. Munich Re ranked the Wenchuan as the top four costliest disaster after the Japanese Tsunami (2011), the Hurricane Katrina (2005). and the Kobe Earthquake (1995). The number of deaths caused by the Tangshan is still controversial because of the Chinese government’s political climates at the time.

A Comparison of the two earthquakes

tanchanwenchan
Yang Zhang William Drake, et al. (2016)

The Rapid Disaster Recovery after the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake
Yang Zhang William Drake, et al. (2016) describes the following points, historical and socio-economic contexts, why the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake recovery was so rapid compared to the 1976’s earthquake.

[Historical context]

  1. The Chinese government drew lessons from its handling of the Tangshan earthquake recovery. The government emphasized the importance of planning for coordinated reconstruction.
  2. China had established a strong planning institution to support its rapid growth agenda since the economic reform began in the late 1970s. The contrast of recovery planning between the two earthquakes highlights the notion that a pre-existing planning institution and pre-existing policy documents that describe development visions for a disaster area.

[Socio-economic context]

  1. China’s ability to promptly fund the earthquake recovery was far superior in the 2000s. China’s annual GDP in the year prior to the Wenchuan earthquake was 3.494 trillion USD 2007, which was 22 times its GDP in 1975.
  2. The earthquake happened less than three months before the Beijing Olympic Games. It was in the government’s best interest to move swiftly with the response and recovery to ensure social stability for the Olympic Games.
  3. The global economic downturn of 2008 might have also played a role in speeding up the earthquake recovery. To stimulate the economy, heavy investment in the earthquake recovery became a convenient policy option.

However, many things can be added about the above points such as the acceptance of international aids (Day_95).

http://disasters.weblike.jp/disasters/archives/2971

 

This rapid recovery from Wenchuan reminds us the Japanese historical trends  from 1945 to 1959, especially after the Typhoon Isewan in 1959. The Haiti’s cases, 2010 Earthquake and 2016 Hurricane Matthew also can be found as the same analogy (The below related articles across the web).

The Meanings of the Lessons
We cannot experience the disasters so often, of course, we do not want to have disasters. This is why we should learn from the past disasters and this is what we can do all the time.

*Yang Zhang William Drake, et al. (2016) Disaster Recovery Planning after Two Catastrophes: The 1976 Tangshan Earthquake and the 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake, International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 34(2):174-203

[ad#ads1]

 

Day_126 : World Disaster Chronology-1989

The accuracy will be improved with citing some data sources.

Date Place Disaster Type Situations
1989.01 USSR, Central (Tajikistan Inland Earthquake M5.3, Over 270(DM)
1989.04.20 China Hail Damage Over 150(DM)
1989.04.26 Bangladesh Tornado The Daulatpur–Saturia Bangladesh tornado*.1300(D)The deadliest tornado disaster in history. 
1989.05- Viet Nam Tropical Storm, Flood Over 740(DM), Tropical Storm Cecil
1989.05- Bangladesh Cyclone, Flood Over 200(DM)
1989.06- China Sichuan Torrential Rains, Flood Over 1,300(DM)
1989.06- Sri Lanka Torrential Rains, Flood 300-500(DM) 
1989.07- India Cyclone, Flood Over 2,700(DM)
1989.07- China Torrential Rains, Flood Over 1,500(DM)
1989.07- Bangladesh Torrential Rains, Flood Over 200(DM)
1989.07- Viet Nam Typhoon, Flood Over 200(DM)
1989.08.01 Iran, West Inland Earthquake M5.8, 120(DM)
1989.09- China Typhoon, Flood Over 520(DM)
1989.10.17 US, West (Calfornia) Inland Earthquake Loma Prieta earthquake **(M7.1) 62(DM), Damage cost 7bill.US

DM: The number of dead and missing.

*The Daulatpur–Saturia, Bangladesh tornado occurred in the Manikganj District, Bangladesh on April 26, 1989. There is great uncertainty about the death toll, but estimates indicate that it killed around 1,300 people, which would make it the deadliest tornado in history. The disasters in Bangladesh indicate natural disaster is not natural.                        Can refer Day_117.

http://disasters.weblike.jp/disasters/archives/3224

**The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake occurred in Northern California on October 17 at 5:04 p.m. local time. This earthquake happened in the northeast of Santa Cruz on a section of the San Andreas Fault.The death toll was relatively not high compared to the economic damage. This can be explained with developed countries, especially US disasters characteristics.  Can refer to The Day_119.

http://disasters.weblike.jp/disasters/archives/3248