Tsunami evacuation: Lessons from the Great East Japan ... - CREW

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2012Table 3 Casualty statistics at locations investigated in this report. JMA intensity source: JapaneseMeteorological Agency, 2011c. Total population source: Statistics Bureau, 2010. Casualty statisticssource: Fire and Disaster Management Agency of Japan, 2012 (except Tarō Town – from IchiroMatsuo, personal communication). These figures do not account for daily movement of populationand fatality rate may have been affected by daily commuting patterns (after EEFIT, 2011)MunicipalityJMAintensityTotalpopulationPopulationresiding ininundatedareaPercentageof total pop.Residing ininundatedareaDead andmissing (at14 feb2012)Fatality rate(populationof inundatedarea)Tarō Town 5L to 5U 4,876 3,000 62% 185 6%KamaishiCity5U to 6L 39,578 13,164 33% 1,047 8%Ōfunato City 6L 40,738 19,073 47% 425 2%KesennumaCityMinami-SanrikuTownIshinomakiCity6L 73,494 40,331 55% 1,368 3%6L 17,431 14,389 83% 875 6%6L 162,822 112,276 69% 3,739 3%Natori City 6U 73,140 12,155 17% 966 8%All areas - 412,079 214,388 52% 8,605 4%1.2 Goals, methodology and report structureMany of the issues experienced in terms of evacuation preparedness and response inTōhoku during this event are extremely relevant to tsunami mitigation activities in the Stateof Washington owing to local earthquake and tsunami hazard posed by the CascadiaSubduction Zone, and in New Zealand due to similar earthquake hazard on the offshoreHikurangi subduction margin.This research set out to investigate key lessons from Japan that are pertinent to emergencymanagement and tsunami preparedness in Washington and New Zealand under thefollowing categories:• Characteristics of tsunami from a high magnitude local subduction zone earthquake(Section 1.1)• Level of tsunami preparedness in affected communities and its role in mitigating life loss(Sections 2.1 and 3.1)• Effectiveness of tsunami warnings and evacuation strategies (including maps and signs)(Sections 2.2 to 2.6 and 3.2 to 3.6)GNS Science Report 2012/17 3
2012• Factors affecting emergency response (Sections 2.3 to 2.5 and 3.3 to 3.5), and• Performance of structures under earthquake shaking and subsequent tsunami loading,particularly those designed for/designated as vertical evacuation (Sections 2.7 and 3.7)The research was commissioned by Washington Military Department EmergencyManagement Division (Washington EMD) and supported by New Zealand Ministry ofScience and Innovation core geohazards funding to GNS Science, and was conducted incollaboration with local Japanese colleagues. The report focusses on lessons forWashington and New Zealand.This report provides a reconnaissance-level analysis of the themes which arose duringinterviews of disaster prevention officials and emergency services officials at seven tsunamiaffectedlocations in Iwate and Miyagi Prefectures. We discuss these themes in Section 2.0,and provide recommendations in Section 3.0 for furthering tsunami preparedness andmitigation in the Washington and in New Zealand. Interview data has been augmented withdiscussion of local maps, posters, reports, documents and signs in both Japanese andEnglish. Appendices 1 and 2 show the interview questions in English and Japanese andAppendix 3 gives a summary of the key points that were raised during interviews. Appendix4 provides a summary of vertical evacuation buildings in the locations visited, includinginformation on construction, signage, inundation on 11 th March, and number of people whotook refuge there.1.3 InterviewsThe field survey was carried out from October 19 th to 28 th 2011 in collaboration with Mr IchiroMatsuo of NPO-CeMI, and Professor Hitomi Murakami of Yamaguchi University. Due to thetiming of the survey 7 months after the tsunami, the interviews draw on information gatheredthrough many surveys carried out by local researchers in the interim period.Semi-structured interviews with city officials (civil protection, emergency management, firedepartment and police department staff) and some local residents were carried out in sevenlocations in Iwate and Miyagi Prefectures: Tarō Town, Kamaishi City, Ōfunato City,Kesennuma City, Minami-Sanriku Town, Ishinomaki City and Natori City. These locationscomprise variable topography of rias and plains, and among them experienced a wide rangeof impacts and evacuation issues on March 11 th 2011. A map of the locations investigated ispresented in Figure 1 and a summary of casualty statistics is provided in Table 3.The focus of interviews was:• Natural and informal warnings: awareness, observations/experience and response• Style and derivation of evacuation maps• Official warning timing and dynamics• Evacuation timing, mechanisms and issues• Vertical evacuation buildings – availability, designation, public awareness, utilisation,relationship to maps, and post-event reviewGNS Science Report 2012/17 4
Page 2 and 3: BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCEFraser, S.;
Page 4 and 5: 20123.5 Movements during and after
Page 6 and 7: 2012Figure 49 The large open car pa
Page 8 and 9: 2012ABSTRACTThe Great East Japan mo
Page 10 and 11: 20121.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 Background
Page 14 and 15: 2012The interview questions were tr
Page 16 and 17: 2012delineated hazard is provided t
Page 18 and 19: 2012Johnston et al. (2005), various
Page 20 and 21: 2012Signs for hazard zones and evac
Page 22 and 23: 20122.0 INTERVIEW OUTCOMESThis sect
Page 24 and 25: 2012Generally maps appear quite cro
Page 26 and 27: 2012Figure 10Ōfunato City evacuati
Page 28 and 29: 2012Figure 12 Minami-Sanriku hazard
Page 30 and 31: 2012Evacuation route signs in Miyak
Page 32 and 33: 2012black icon used, but this symbo
Page 34 and 35: 2012In Ishinomaki, we observed a ma
Page 36 and 37: 2012This advice is appropriate for
Page 38 and 39: 2012Table 5 Time sequence of JMA ts
Page 40 and 41: 2012hazard through numerical modell
Page 42 and 43: 2012In order to combat traffic cong
Page 44 and 45: 2012tsunami drills (Johnson, 2011).
Page 46 and 47: 2012negative impacts of significant
Page 48 and 49: 2012Damage was limited to glazing a
Page 50 and 51: 2012Figure 39Figure 40Maiya shoppin
Page 52 and 53: 2012Figure 46 An office building in
Page 54 and 55: 2012Figure 52 Kesennuma central com
Page 56 and 57: 2012Figure 56 The Takano Kaikan bui
Page 58 and 59: 2012Figure 62 The Hotaru funeral fa
Page 60 and 61: 2012Figure 67 Yuriage Junior High S
Page 62 and 63:
2012• Building owners agree to br
Page 64 and 65:
20123.2.2 Hazard/evacuation signsWa
Page 66 and 67:
20123.4.2 Warning systemsAny tsunam
Page 68 and 69:
2012This school-community approach
Page 70 and 71:
20123.7.3 Evacuation building signa
Page 72 and 73:
2012Clallam County Emergency Manage
Page 74 and 75:
2012Kurowski, M. J., Hedley, N., an
Page 76 and 77:
2012Washington State Department of
Page 78 and 79:
2012a. How did the disaster managem
Page 80 and 81:
2012・災害対策本部に
Page 82 and 83:
2012・夜間に鍵がかか
Page 84 and 85:
2012Earthquake and tsunamiTarō Tow
Page 86 and 87:
2012Earthquake and tsunamiTarō Tow
Page 88 and 89:
2012City/town Building Construction
Page 90 and 91:
2012City/town Building Construction
show all

Tsunami evacuation: Lessons from the Great East Japan ... - CREW

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?