Category Archives: Environment

When Help Can’t Come: What the 1995 Kobe Earthquake Still Teaches Us About Surviving Disaster

In 15 seconds, 6,434 people lost their lives — and the rescuers who saved the most were not professionals. They were neighbors.
6,434 lives lost in the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake80%+ of deaths caused by building collapse and falling furniture1–2% of survivors rescued by professional emergency services

I was in Kyoto that morning

At around 6 a.m. on January 17, 1995, I was just waking up in Kyoto. I remember feeling a faint tremor. I thought it might be a dream. When I walked to the nearby station to check the trains, and then arrived at my office to find no one there, I turned on the television — and saw images I have never been able to forget: elevated expressways on their sides, rows of wooden homes pancaked flat, smoke rising across an entire district of Kobe.

I was working in tourism at the time. That morning changed the direction of my life. I went on to join the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention in Japan, investigating disasters from Katrina to Ondoy to the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake. I now research disaster resilience at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok. And across every disaster I have studied, one truth keeps surfacing: what happens in the first 15 minutes is determined by what people did — or did not do — in the weeks and months before.

Fifteen seconds. 6,434 lives.

At 5:46 a.m. on January 17, 1995, the Nojima Fault ruptured beneath the northern tip of Awaji Island, generating a Japan Meteorological Agency magnitude-7.3 earthquake. The strongest shaking lasted no more than 15 to 20 seconds. But in those seconds, the outcome for most victims was already decided. More than 80 percent of those who died were crushed or suffocated beneath collapsed buildings and toppled furniture — almost all in wooden structures built before Japan’s 1981 earthquake-resistant building code revision. The majority died almost instantly, before any rescue could have reached them. Over 100 fires broke out simultaneously. A 600-meter section of the elevated Hanshin Expressway toppled sideways. Water mains ruptured across the city, leaving fire crews with no water to fight the flames. More than 300,000 people poured into evacuation centers in mid-January cold.

“Kobe did not fail because rescuers were slow. It failed because, when an entire city is struck at once, professional rescue is physically impossible at scale. That was the lesson. It took the world by surprise.”

Who actually saved people?

A post-disaster survey conducted in one Kobe ward asked survivors rescued from collapsed buildings a single question: who helped you get out? The answer was striking. The overwhelming majority were freed by themselves, by family members, or by neighbors — by people who were physically present in the first minutes. Professional rescue services — fire departments, police, the Self-Defense Forces — accounted for only an estimated 1 to 2 percent of rescues in the acute phase.

This is not a criticism of those services. They responded. But roads were blocked, phones were down, and simultaneous structural collapses across an entire metropolitan area created a physical impossibility: no rescue organization, however skilled or well-resourced, can be everywhere at once when an entire city falls. The real rescuers that morning were the neighbors who grabbed bicycle frames and iron pipes to lever beams off pinned family members in the dark.

This single finding — 1 to 2 percent professional rescue — is widely credited as the moment Japan’s disaster policy pivoted permanently toward community-level preparedness. It gave rise to the framework now central to Japan’s DRR thinking: Jijo–Kyojo–Kōjo.

The survival ratio in a city-scale disaster (acute phase)

Self-help (Jijo)  — 70%Mutual (Kyojo)  20%Public 10%

This is not a rigid formula. It is a policy reminder: in the acute phase of a city-scale disaster, survival is predominantly a household and neighborhood question. Public help is essential — but it is slower and finite. Self-help is the foundation that lets you reach the moment when mutual-help and public-help can act.

The Tanaka family: a story rooted in real experience

In my research, I use case-based scenarios to make these dynamics visible. Consider a composite family — based on documented experiences in Kobe’s Nagata Ward — that I will call the Tanaka household. Hiroshi (42), a shoe-factory worker; his wife Keiko (39); their teenage daughter Aoi and young son Ren; and Hiroshi’s mother Sumiko (71), who has limited mobility from arthritis and takes daily blood-pressure medication. They live in a two-story wooden row house built decades before the 1981 code.

When the quake hit, the second floor partially collapsed onto the first. Hiroshi and Keiko were pinned by a fallen wardrobe. Aoi was trapped under a collapsed beam. Sumiko could not move. It took nearly an hour — with neighbors using a bicycle and a length of pipe — to free Sumiko as fire spread through the block. They evacuated barefoot, in nightclothes, in near-freezing air. Sumiko’s medication bottle was buried in the rubble. So were the bank books, the property deed, and the insurance papers.

Every difficulty this family faced was foreseeable. Almost all of it was preventable. That is the defining lesson of Kobe.

What you can do — starting tonight

As a researcher who has walked through disaster zones from New Orleans to the Philippines to Japan’s Tohoku coast, I am often asked what the single most important thing a household can do is. The honest answer is that it is not one thing — but all of the following are straightforward, low-cost, and evidence-backed.

1. Anchor all tall furniture in your bedroom

The number-one killer in Kobe was not the earthquake itself, but falling wardrobes and bookshelves onto sleeping people. An L-bracket costs less than lunch.

2. Place shoes and a flashlight beside your bed

Glass-covered floors in the dark are a serious injury risk after any structural event. Do this tonight before you sleep.

3. Build a 3-to-7-day stockpile of water and food

3 liters of water per person per day, plus food requiring no cooking. In Kobe, water mains in some areas were not fully restored for months.

4. Keep essential medications grab-ready

At least one week of any chronic-disease prescription, children’s inhalers, or blood pressure drugs — in a sealed pouch outside the collapse zone. For Sumiko, this was a near-fatal omission.

5. Digitize your key documents

Photograph your ID, property deed, insurance policies, and bank documents. Store copies in the cloud and with a relative in another city. Lost documents delay every form of recovery assistance.

6. Agree on two meeting points

One just outside the building, one nearby landmark. Assign who is responsible for each vulnerable member. Do not rely on mobile phones — lines fail in disasters.

7. Run a household drill twice a year

A kit you have never practiced with, with expired medication and no agreed plan, is a false comfort. The preparation is the practice.

Mutual-help: the neighbor you know is the neighbor who digs you out

Self-help has limits. Sumiko survived because neighbors came. In modern cities, it is not uncommon to not know the person living next door. But my field research across Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines confirms the same finding repeatedly: communities that recover fastest — and lose the fewest lives in the acute phase — are communities where people already knew each other before the disaster.

You do not need a formal community organization to start. A brief greeting in the elevator. Passing along a neighborhood bulletin with a few words added. Attending one local meeting. These small acts create familiarity — and familiarity, in a disaster, means you are someone a neighbor will think to check on. That is not sentimentality. It is disaster science.

In the months after the 1995 earthquake, over one million volunteers descended on Kobe from across Japan. That outpouring is remembered as the birth of modern volunteer culture in Japan. It was remarkable. But the real mutual-help happened in the first hour — in the hands of people already there, already awake, already digging.

Disasters are social, not just natural

I want to close with something that three decades of research have made impossible for me to ignore. The scale of deaths in Kobe was not determined by the earthquake alone. It was determined by which buildings people were sleeping in, and which neighborhoods they lived in. Homes built before 1981 — concentrated in older, lower-income districts — collapsed at far higher rates than newer structures. The same magnitude of shaking killed far fewer people in neighborhoods with newer construction.

This is the core argument of disaster research as I practice it: the disaster begins before the disaster. Vulnerability — to poverty, to age, to disability, to housing precarity — shapes who is at risk long before any fault line moves. Individual preparedness matters enormously. But so does the society we build together. Ensuring that the most vulnerable households have access to retrofitting subsidies, medication coverage, and document support is not charity. It is evidence-based risk reduction.

At 5:46 a.m. on January 17, 1995, I was in Kyoto and barely noticed the tremor. Most people in Kobe had no warning at all. The question that has driven my research ever since is simple: what, in the days and weeks before that morning, could have changed what happened in those 15 seconds?

The answer — every time — is: quite a lot.

Key takeaway

The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake proved that when a city is struck all at once, professional rescue is overwhelmed within minutes — and the vast majority of survivors are saved by themselves, their families, and their neighbors. Real resilience is built before disaster strikes: anchor your furniture, stockpile for at least three days, protect medications and documents, agree on how to reunite, and practice. Self-help and mutual-help are not substitutes for public assistance — they are what keep you alive until it arrives.

Sources & further reading

Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake documentation: Cabinet Office, Japan (https://www.bousai.go.jp/kyoiku/kyokun/hanshin_awaji/)

Disaster Research Notes (Nakasu): disasterresearchnotes.site (https://disasterresearchnotes.site)

Sendai Framework for DRR (2015–2030): UNDRR (https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030)

Note:

This is my personal experience and knowledge. Disaster preparedness depends entirely on your situation. Please use this article for your reference.

【The 2011 Chao Phraya River Floods Case Study Content: Nikkei BizRuptors (website)】

Balancing Continuity and Survival: Lessons for Overseas Manufacturers from Thailand’s 2001 Flood

【Updated : Disaster Links Library launched (website)】

Disaster Link Library

Day_191 : The Comprehensive Guide to Understanding Droughts

Recent years have seen a substantial impact of both climate change and human activities on droughts, which are complex and multifaceted natural phenomena. Droughts are marked by prolonged periods of precipitation that fall below average, resulting in significant scarcity of water that has far-reaching consequences for economies and ecosystems worldwide. This expanded guide delves deeper into the causes of droughts, their wide-ranging impacts, and the innovative solutions needed to mitigate their effects.

Causes of Droughts

Droughts arise from a blend of natural variability and human-induced factors. Key natural causes include shifts in atmospheric circulation patterns, which can disrupt traditional weather patterns, and the ongoing challenge of global warming, which intensifies evaporation rates, reducing soil moisture and water availability. Human activities, such as deforestation, directly alter land use and local climates, further diminishing rainfall and aggravating drought conditions. Additionally, the unsustainable use of water resources and pollution significantly strain water supplies. A comprehensive understanding of these factors is essential for crafting effective and sustainable drought mitigation strategies.

The Multidimensional Impacts of Droughts

The consequences of droughts extend far beyond the immediate lack of water, affecting environmental, economic, and social spheres. Environmentally, droughts can cause severe soil degradation, loss of plant and animal life, and an increased incidence of wildfires. Economically, they can devastate agricultural productivity, leading to food scarcity, skyrocketing prices, and a decrease in energy production, especially in regions reliant on hydroelectric power. Socially, the effects of droughts can be devastating, causing displacement, heightening conflicts over dwindling resources, and exacerbating health crises due to limited water supplies. The impacts are particularly pronounced in developing nations, where agriculture forms the backbone of the economy.

Historical Context of Droughts

Historically, droughts have posed significant challenges to civilizations, with events like the Dust Bowl of the 1930s in the United States serving as stark reminders of their potential severity. Recent droughts, such as the prolonged one in California, underscore the increasing frequency and intensity of these events in the face of climate change. Studying these historical droughts offers invaluable lessons for current and future drought preparedness and response strategies.

Measuring and Monitoring Droughts

Accurately measuring and monitoring droughts is crucial for early detection and response. The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) and other metrics like soil moisture and streamflow offer insights into drought severity and progression. Advancements in remote sensing and satellite imagery provide comprehensive data on drought impacts over large areas, facilitating timely and effective mitigation efforts.

Global Drought Conditions and Responses

Droughts today impact vast regions globally, with severe conditions persisting in areas such as the Sahel in Africa, Maharashtra in India, and across Australia. These conditions call for a unified global response, integrating both traditional strategies and innovative technologies to address the multifaceted challenges of droughts.

Forward-Looking Solutions for Drought Mitigation

Sustainable water management practices are foundational to drought mitigation. Techniques like rainwater harvesting, water recycling, and the adoption of efficient irrigation methods can dramatically improve water security. Embracing drought-resistant crops and soil conservation techniques further bolsters agricultural resilience. Innovatively, solutions such as desalination and cloud seeding present promising avenues for augmenting water supplies, while genetically modified crops offer potential for enhanced drought resistance.

A Unified Call to Action

The challenge of droughts is formidable but not insurmountable. With a deep understanding of their causes and impacts, combined with a commitment to sustainable management and innovative solutions, we can confront droughts effectively. It is a collective responsibility, from policymakers to individuals, to foster a resilient and sustainable approach to water management. Together, we can ensure a water-secure future for all, safeguarding our environment, economy, and societies against the enduring challenge of droughts.

Day_180: The Aftermath of “Natural” Disasters: Long-term Effects

The enduring consequences of natural disasters can be equally as catastrophic as their immediate repercussions. They frequently result in economic instability, social turmoil, and environmental destruction. Furthermore, they have the potential to establish a harmful cycle of destitution and susceptibility, particularly in developing countries.

For example, the act of demolishing infrastructure has the potential to interrupt vital services, including healthcare, education, and transportation. These consequences can have extensive effects on the progress of social and economic development, impeding endeavors to alleviate poverty and enhance living conditions.

<The Impact of Natural Disasters on Global Economies>

Natural disasters exert a substantial influence on global economics. They have the potential to inflict substantial financial losses, interrupt the flow of goods and services, and impede economic progress. Furthermore, they have the potential to worsen economic disparities, as individuals with few means are frequently the most severely affected.

As an illustration, the earthquake and tsunami that occurred in Japan in 2011 resulted in around $360 billion in losses, establishing it as the most expensive natural catastrophe in recorded history. The occurrence additionally prompted a nuclear catastrophe, exacerbating the economic and societal repercussions.

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_164 : Development Environment Disaster Cycle Model

As mentioned before in Day_56, it is clear the model, development-environment-disaster cycle model is an analyzer that can be considered in a wide range of areas. In other words, this analysis perspective raises the sociological position of natural disasters, and the stepping stone of their historical and geographical connections become clearer. We believe that it will even be possible to provide various perspectives to prevent it from being guided.

https://disasterresearchnotes.site/archives/2598

Analytical Viewing Angle by Causal Cycle Model: Case of Isewan Typhoon Disaster and Indian Ocean Tsunami Disaster

In this section, Isewan typhoon disaster and Indian Ocean tsunami disaster are specifically analyzed using the analysis view angle, the causal cycle model of development, environment, and disaster. The first is the Isewan Typhoon that hit Nagoya on September 26, 1959. The disaster was a turning point of disaster management in postwar Japan, but focusing on driftwood damage, which is one of the important aspects of the disaster, the economic recovery of postwar Japan, trade with the United States, and Japan. Forest management, natural disasters such as landslides, the problem of hay fever, which is also called national illness, and the inter-relationship between deforestation and natural disasters in the Philippines, which becomes today, will become clear. Second, regarding the Indian Ocean Tsunami that caused enormous damage on December 26, 2004, mainly in the countries around the Indian Ocean, the damage in Thailand will be analyzed. This analysis reveals the development-environment-disaster in Thailand and its relationship with Japan and Western countries.

The figures are shown as follows:

Figure 1: Interconnections of Typhoon Isewan Disaster

Figure 2: Interconnections of Indian Ocean Tsunami Disasters in Thailand

sponsored link

Day_150: Sea Level, Rainfall, and Temperature Changes in Thailand

Bangkok is very hot this year.  Just share the results which I did on sea level, rainfall and temperature changes in Thailand from a long-range perspective.

The tide gauge at KO LAK in PrachuapKhri Khan indicates the annual mean sea level is rising. Especially, the sea level is rapidly rising after 2000.

Temperature

Warmer than before and the gap between warmer and colder (STD) is smaller.

Rainfall

Almost all the same average and std, but we can see the pattern (the peak) has changed.

The rainfall peak became earlier.

Will explain in detail later………..

Day_104 : Lessons from a Japanese Environmental Movement- The Matsumura Research Group (2)

Mishima Numazu Shimizu (MNS) environmental movement in 1963-1964 is the turning point of a Japanese environmental history. The core of the movement is the science-based issues, especially, The Environmental Impact Assessment conducted by the Government Research Group and the Local Research Group.

https://disasterresearchnotes.site/archives/2981

Proposed the Development Plan

The below Figure 1 and Table 1 indicate the proposed development plan. These are the companies which had planned to come to the area. You can also see the scale of the plan.

planned project MNS
Figure 1  Proposed an Industrial Complex Plan

Table 1 The Scale of the Plan

The planned MNS

What is the MNS Movement?
The following two factors can be highlighted to explain the MNS movement. The first, the survey carried out by students (KOINOBORI research). The second, a few hundred education programs (mainly for local citizens)

In regard to the student survey, the survey carried out by students of Numazu Technical High School consists of three types by using local materials which were KOINOBORI, empty bottles and thermometers. The KOINOBORI were used in the air current survey that was conducted by about 300 students. The students made some air current maps that showed that the government’s appraisal of wind direction was incorrect. These maps gave decisive data to the Matsumura research group. Empty bottles were used for the water current survey. Thermometers enabled the students to make some maps showing the variation of temperatures.

On the other hand, the results of the survey reported by students of East Numazu High School which were called “Petrochemical Complex Project in Numazu and Mishima Area” was conducted by a Local Research Club. They researched it by using social scientific methods (including the survey in Yokkaichi City). The MNS activists use this report.

With reference to the education programs, many education programs were conducted by Numazu Technical High School teachers. They were held at schools, at the town halls and in the streets. Because of the programs, local citizens (including farmers and fishermen) became eager to learn. Local citizens wanted to know what was going on in their locality.

The Students Participatory Survey

The following Figure 2  shows the wind directions are from the sea to the land. This map was created by the students during the Koinobori time. This means the local people would be influenced by the pollutions from the planned factories. However, the government survey appealed the different ways.

Wind directions student survey
Figure2  Wind directions survey conducted by high school students
(Source :  Mitsuo Taketani, 1967)

The Kurokawa Research Group (Gov. Research group) carried out the first largest ever Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) by the Japanese government in 1964. The representative was Dr.Masatake Kurokawa and the staff consisted of national academics. The budget was about 20 million yen (about 180,000 USD) at that time. The research was carried out by using helicopters and high-tech machines. The Kurokawa Research Group was nominated by the Minister of International Trade and Industry and the Minister of Public Health.

On the other hand, the Matsumura Research Group carried out the EIA by getting the cooperation of local people, including high school students. The representative was Dr.Seiji Matsumura and the staff consisted of two researchers with international experience and local high school teachers (Table 2). The budget was about 100 thousand yen (about 900 USD) at that time. The research was conducted using readily available materials and low-tech manpower (for example, Koinobori research). It meant that research people, as well as the local people and high school students, used their own ideas. The Matsumura research group was nominated by the Mayor of Mishima city, Mr.Taizo Hasegawa. They use students, local materials, and Japanese culture.

Table 2 Matsumura Research Group

local research group members
* I have life stories about them by interview surveys

The Formation of the Matsumura Research Group

The following is the formation process of the Matsumura Research Group. The National Institute and the Local high school have bonded together. These make ‘Think globally, act locally’.

  1. Education Seminar about Pollution Held by Two High School Teachers and a Professor
  2. Explanation of the Estimated Pollution Levels Given to the NIG (National Institute of Genetics) by Mr.Nagaoka and Mr.Nishioka (Teachers)
  3. Decided by the NIG Members to Refuse the Petrochemical Complex Plan
  4. Advice Given to Mishima City’s Mayor (Hasegawa) from the NIG Members to Establish the Research Committee for EIA
  5. Decision by Hasegawa to Reject the Proposed Petrochemical Complex
  6. Acceptance of Numazu Technical High School and NIG to do EIA in the Area

To be continued.