Risk and Vulnerability Investigation for Japan - Essay Example

?RISK AND VULNERABILITY REPORT FOR JAPAN FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4 KEY THEMES This study is an assessment research that looks at risk and hazards for Japan. As part of further studies, there shall be related areas to the topic, which shall include vulnerability studies in Japan, the concept of community and its role in disaster as well as possible interventional measures that are at the disposal of Japan to address her risk and hazard situations. The study is being undertaken by a consortium of organisations for the Government of Japan as a way of exposing the types of disasters that affect the country and how the country can best manage these disasters. The report has thus been structured around four major themes which are illustrated in the figure below. Figure 1: Key Themes The presentation and discussion of results shall be done around these four themes. There shall however be minor areas of consideration such as geography of Japan and vulnerability in Japan. Presentation and discussion of results on the themes shall all be done both qualitatively and quantitatively using figures, maps, tables and diagrams. 4.2 PRESENTATION AND DESCRIPTION OF RESULTS AND FINDINGS Geography of Japan According to JapanGuide.Com (2011), “Japan's closest neighbors are Korea, Russia and China. The Sea of Japan separates the Asian continent from the Japanese archipelago.” Japan is located in Eastern Asia and within the geographical coordinates, 36 00N, 138 00E (CIA Fact book, 2011). Japan’s total area is 377,835 sq km, 374,744 sq km of which is land and 3,091 sq km is water. Islands in Japan in Daito-shoto, Bonin Islands, Volcano Islands, Minami-Jima Ryukyu Islands and Okino-tori-shrima; out of which “Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu and Shikoku are the four largest” (JapanGuide.Com, 2011). Japan’s climate varies across the country however; there are four major seasons – winter, rainy season, summer and typhoons. The most dominant natural resource in Japan is fish whereas there are negligible mineral resources. Below is the political map of Japan Credit: Geography and Map of Japan, 2011 Types of Risks and Hazards in Japan Japan is faced with many forms of risks and hazards; prominent among them are chemical and environmental risks and hazards. This study however is limited to environmental hazards and risks. “Environmental hazards are defined as extreme events or substances in the earth and its ecological system that may cause adverse effects to humans or things they value” (NRC, 1996). For the sake of this research, risk and hazards that have occurred from 1980 to 2010 are going to be reviewed. The graph below shows the number of natural disasters that have occurred in Japan from 1980 to 2010. Fig. 2: Natural Disasters in Japan from 1980 to 2010 It is worth mentioning that Japan’s earthquakes are accompanied with tsunamis (Prevention Web, 2011). The data above is translated into a yearly ratio as follows Table 1: Yearly Average of Occurrence of Natural Disasters in Japan Disaster Average Occurrence Wildfire Extreme Temperature Volcano Flood Earthquake Storm 0.03 0.10 0.26 0.71 1.00 2.48 Credit: (Prevention Web, 2011). Human Vulnerability in Japan The various risks and hazards that Japan experiences expose the country and her population to high rate of vulnerability. Japan has suffered both economic and human losses through natural disasters. The chart below gives a summary of such losses from 1980 to 2010. Fig. 3 Vulnerability to Humans per Event of a Disaster - Credit: (Prevention Web, 2011). The concept of Community and its Role in Disaster Most communities in Japan are prone to risks of volcanoes and earthquakes. “The reason for the high number of volcanic areas is because Japan is located along the circum-Pacific volcanic belt. Of the 840 active volcanoes in the world, Japan has almost 1/10 of them” (AsiaInfo.Net, 2010). For this reason, communities in Japan put in a lot of effort to play active roles in disaster management. In the view of Tatum (2011), “disaster management plans are often multi-layered and can address such issues as floods, hurricanes, fires, bombings, and even mass failures of utilities or the rapid spread of disease.” A survey conducted in several Japanese communities revealed that community members embark on both preventive and control programs as far as natural risks and hazards are concerned. Key among such community based risk management programs are Community sponsored researches in identifying types of catastrophes that are likely to erupt and at what time; organization of community sensitization watchdog committees who are tasked with educating the masses on what to do in times of natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes; community based relief agencies who support natural disaster victims and finally community based law enforcement committees who ensure that people to not reside in places tagged as disaster prone areas. Risk/Hazard Prevention and Control Measures for Japan The government of Japan’s quest to put in place workable preventive and control measures for risks and hazards dates back to the first World War Era. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (MOFA, 2011), disasters that occurred in Japan between the World War I and the 1960’s “prompted the establishment of a planned and comprehensive disaster prevention administration system, and in 1961 the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act was enacted.” In this research, fifty Japanese were sampled at random from the length and breadth of Japan and from all social class to answer questionnaires on propriety areas they want government of Japan to focus on as far as risks and hazards in Japan are concerned. The table below represents answers from respondents Table 2: Priority Areas Citizens want Government to focus on in Risk/Hazards in Japan Suggestion Number of Respondents Percentage (%) Research into the scientific technicalities of disasters Disaster monitoring and early warning Emergency handling of victims Prompt disaster relief support Prompt Rehabilitation and reconstruction 11 19 6 6 8 22 38 12 12 16 Total 50 100 From the table above, 22% of respondents want government to tackle first on her agenda for disaster, the research into the scientific technicalities of disasters. 38% of respondents want government to handle first, disaster monitoring and early warning. 12% of respondents want government to prioritize emergency handling of risk and hazard victims whereas the same percentage of respondents wants govern to prioritize prompt disaster relief support. The remaining 16% of respondents wish that government prioritize prompt rehabilitation and reconstruction after disasters strike. Evaluation of Disaster Assessment Models as part of Disaster Intervention Strategy for Japan Assess Models are models “that explores how an individual or groups relative resilience to disasters is impacted by differences in access to the economic or political resources needed to secure a livelihood.” That is according to Disaster Assessment Portal (DAP, 2011). This is part of techniques used in disaster risk assessment. Research has proven that disaster assessment models play important role in serving as disaster intervention strategy for reducing the effect of risks and hazard on citizens of Japan. According to DAP, “the model provides a broad view of vulnerability including root causes, it gives weight to natural hazards, and it provides a framework for looking at livelihoods and vulnerability.” In a structured interview with a group of ten (10) meteorologists as to the best way results from risk assessment models may be used as interventions in handling risks and hazards in Japan, they each pointed to one area. Their responses are tabulated below. Table 3: The best ways Assessment Models can be used as Interventions Role of Assessment Models Number of Respondents Percentage (%) Pointing to the cause of the problem Measuring the needs of victims Measuring weight of entire disaster Preventing future occurrence 3 1 1 5 30 10 10 50 Total 10 100 From the table, 30% of the respondents believed that results from assessment models can best serve as interventions when they are focused on the cause of the disasters. 10% suggested that when results from assessment models are directed towards measuring the needs of victims, that is when it can be referred to as playing an interventional role. The same percentage pointed to using results from assessment models in measuring the weight of the entire disaster as the best way of using assessment models as interventions whereas 50% of the respondents pointed to the fact that channelling results form assessment models in preventing future occurrences is the best way to use assessment models as interventions. 4.3 DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS The results and data presented above have specific interpretations and implications for the government of Japan. Firstly, in with the theme of types of risks and hazards in Japan, the findings make it clear that Japan is worse disadvantaged when it comes to risks of natural disasters than any other form of risk. Ranking highest among these disasters are flood, volcanoes and earthquakes, which are mostly accompanied with tsunamis. The implication for the Japanese government is to forensic science based researches that would be directed towards predicting the eruption of these natural disasters and cautioning its citizens accordingly. In the area of community participation in risk and hazard management in Japan, the results reveal that local citizens (communities for that matter) are doing well as far as partaking in risk and hazard management is concerned. The community has not left all the responsibility for government but has embraced itself as a stakeholder in preventing and controlling risks and hazards, which are almost inevitable in Japan. Commenting on the need for community participation, the Ohio University Fact Sheet, states that “citizen can bring about desired change by expressing one's desire, either individually or through a community group”. On the theme of risk and hazard prevention and control, the results revealed that the Japan citizenry are more concerned with the preventive aspect of risks and hazards than the control of it. From the survey conducted, a total of 60% of respondents chose research into the scientific technicalities of disasters and disaster monitoring and early warning as the areas the government should focus attention on most. All these are also preventive measures in the sense that once scientific research is conducted to understand the technicalities of disasters, there would for instance be a pattern of occurrence detected. Knowing this pattern, citizens can best be informed of times that disasters may strike and so they may take measures to save their lives and property. Finally, the theme of assessment model points to the fact that as much as expects like meteorologists embrace risk assessment models, they are also concerned about how data or results from the assessments handled. The interview with these experts point to the fact that government should focus more on making inference to the part of the assessment that points to prevention and identification of cause rather than paying so much attention to the aftermath of the disasters. This is a good analogy judging from the fact that if government is able to prevent the intensity of harm that disasters have on citizens, there may very little if not none to cater for in times of disasters. To conclude, this consortium admits that natural disasters in Japan may not be preventable but the risk and vulnerability of them on citizens can be prevented. This can be done by spending a lot of resource into scientific research that would be geared towards predicting the trend and pattern of disasters such as earthquake, volcanoes, flood, tsunamis and drought. Once the prediction is done, citizens can best be guided on how they can escape the disasters because the disasters would not come unto them unaware. Technology keeps advancing and with Japan as one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, it should embrace scientific insight into reducing if not eliminating the danger of risks and hazards on its citizenry. . REFERENCES AisaInfo.Net, 2010, Japan’s Geography, accessed 7th February 2011 CIA Fact Book, 2011 Japan Geography, accessed 9th February 2011 Disaster Assessment Portal, DAP, 2011, Techniques Used in Disaster Risk Assessment, accessed 9th February 2011 Geography and Map of Japan, 2011, Japan, accessed 5th February 2011 Japan Geography, 2011, Japan Guide, accessed 9th February 2011 < http://www.japan-guide.com/list/e1000.html> MOFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), 2011, Disasters and Disaster Prevention in Japan, accessed 9th February 2011 NRC (National Academy of Science, National Research Council) 1996, Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. National Academy Press, Washington DC Ohio University Fact Sheet, Citizen Participation In Community Development, accessed on 8th February 2011 Prevention Web, 2011, Japan – Disaster Statistics, accessed 4th February 2011 Tatum M, 2011, What is Disaster Management, Wise Geek, accessed 4th February 2011 Read More