Integrated Disaster Risk Management

De ning and

Measuring

Economic Resilience

from a Societal,

Environmental and

Security Perspective

Adam Rose

Integrated Disaster Risk Management

Series Editor in Chief

Norio Okada, Kwansei Gakuin University

Series Editors

Aniello Amendola, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (retired)

Adam Rose, University of Southern California

Ana Maria Cruz, Kyoto University

About the Series

Just the ﬁrst one and one-half decades of this new century have witnessed a series

of large-scale, unprecedented disasters in different regions of the globe, both natural

and human-triggered, some conventional and others quite new. Unfortunately, this

adds to the evidence of the urgent need to address such crises as time passes. It is

now commonly accepted that disaster risk reduction (DRR) requires tackling the

various factors that inﬂuence a society’s vulnerability to disasters in an integrated

and comprehensive way, and with due attention to the limited resources at our

disposal. Thus, integrated disaster risk management (IDRiM) is essential. Success

will require integration of disciplines, stakeholders, different levels of government,

and of global, regional, national, local, and individual efforts. In any particular

disaster-prone area, integration is also crucial in the long-enduring processes of

managing risks and critical events before, during, and after disasters.

Although the need for integrated disaster risk management is widely recognized,

there are still considerable gaps between theory and practice. Civil protection

authorities; government agencies in charge of delineating economic, social, urban,

or environmental policies; city planning, water and waste-disposal departments;

health departments, and others often work independently and without consideration

of the hazards in their own and adjacent territories or the risk to which they may be

unintentionally subjecting their citizens. Typically, disaster and development tend to

be in mutual conﬂict but should, and could, be creatively governed to harmonize

both, thanks to technological innovation as well as the design of new institutions.

Thus, many questions on how to implement integrated disaster risk management

in different contexts, across different hazards, and interrelated issues remain.

Furthermore, the need to document and learn from successfully applied risk reduc-

tion initiatives, including the methodologies or processes used, the resources, the

context, and other aspects are imperative to avoid duplication and the repetition of

mistakes.

With a view to addressing the above concerns and issues, the International

Society of Integrated Disaster Risk Management (IDRiM) was established in

October 2009.

The main aim of the IDRiM Book Series is to promote knowledge transfer and

dissemination of information on all aspects of IDRiM. This series will provide com-

prehensive coverage of topics and themes including dissemination of successful

models for implementation of IDRiM and comparative case studies, innovative

countermeasures for disaster risk reduction, and interdisciplinary research and edu-

cation in real-world contexts in various geographic, climatic, political, cultural, and

social systems.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13465

Adam Rose

Deﬁning and Measuring

Economic Resilience from

a Societal, Environmental

and Security Perspective

ISSN 2509-7091 ISSN 2509-7105 (electronic)

Integrated Disaster Risk Management

ISBN 978-981-10-1532-8 ISBN 978-981-10-1533-5 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-1533-5

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016959389

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of

the material is concerned, speciﬁcally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,

broadcasting, reproduction on microﬁlms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information

storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology

now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication

does not imply, even in the absence of a speciﬁc statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant

protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book

are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the

editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors

or omissions that may have been made.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #22-06/08 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,

Singapore

Adam Rose

CREATE

University of Southern California

Los Angeles, CA, USA

To my grandsons Kellan and Ben

vii

In 2001, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and the

Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI) joined hands in fostering a new,

interdisciplinary area of integrated disaster risk management. That year, IIASA and

DPRI initiated the IIASA–DPRI Integrated Disaster Risk Management Forum

Series, which continued over 8 years, helping to build a scholarly network that even-

tually evolved into the formation of the International Society for Integrated Disaster

Risk Management (IDRiM Society) in 2009. The launching of the society was pro-

moted by many national and international organizations.

The volumes in the IDRiM Book Series are the continuation of a proud tradition

of interdisciplinary research on integrated risk management that emanates from

many scholars and practitioners around the world. In this foreword, we brieﬂy sum-

marize the contributions of some of the pioneers in this ﬁeld. We have endeavored

to be inclusive but realize that we have probably not identiﬁed all those worthy of

mention. This foreword is not meant to be comprehensive but rather indicative of

major contributions to the foundations of IDRiM. This research area is still in a

continuous process of exploration and advancement, several of the outcomes of

which will be published in this series.

Japan

Disaster Prevention Research Institute

The idea of framing disaster prevention in risk management terms was still embry-

onic even among academics in Japan when Kobe and its neighboring region were

shaken by the Great Hanshin–Awaji Earthquake (GHQ) in 1995. For example,

Okada (1985) established the importance of introducing a risk management

approach to reduce ﬂood and landslide disaster risks. Additionally, it was not until

late 1994 that the Disaster Prevention Research Institute (DPRI) of Kyoto University

Foreword to the IDRiM Book Series

viii

had reorganized to add a new cross-disciplinary division of Sogo Bosai, or “inte-

grated disaster management.”

The new division of DPRI undertook a strong initiative among both academics

and disaster prevention professionals to substantiate what is meant by integrated

disaster management and to communicate to society why it is needed and how it

helps. Many of these efforts were based on evidence and lessons learned from the

GHQ. Japan’s disaster planning and management policy changed signiﬁcantly

thereafter. Table 1 contrasts the approaches before and after that cataclysmic event.

The current approach stresses strategies that are proactive, anticipatory, precaution-

ary, adaptive, participatory, and bottom-up. The rationale is that governments in

Japan had been found to be of relatively little help immediately after a high-impact

disaster. Lives in peril had more often been saved by the actions of individuals and

community residents than by ofﬁcial governmental ﬁrst responders.

To understand a signiﬁcant change in disaster planning and management in

Japan, one must understand the contrasts among Kyojo (“neighborhood or commu-

nity self-reliance”), Jijo (“individual or household self-reliance”), and Kojo (“gov-

ernment assistance”). Realizing limitations in the government’s capacity after a

large-scale disaster, Japan has shifted more toward increasing both Kyojo and Jijo

self-reliance roles, and to depend less on the former, which in the past was the major

agent to mitigate disasters.

One of the additional lessons learned after the 1995 disaster was to address the

need for a citizen-led participatory approach to disaster risk reduction before disas-

ters, as well as for disaster recovery and revitalization after disasters.

International Collaboration

In 2001, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and DPRI

started to join hands in fostering a new disciplinary area of integrated disaster risk

management. That year, IIASA and DPRI agreed to initiate the IIASA–DPRI

Integrated Disaster Risk Management Forum Series. Eight annual forums were held

under this initiative, helping to build a scholarly network that eventually evolved

into the formation of the IDRiM Society in 2009.

Table 1 Conventional disaster plan vs. 21st century integrated disaster planning and management

Reactive Proactive

Emergency and crisis management Risk mitigation plus preparedness approach

Countermeasure manual approach Anticipatory/precautionary approach

Pre-determined planning (if known events) Comprehensive policy-bundle approach

Sectoral countermeasure approach Adaptive management approach

Top-down approach Bottom-up approach

Foreword to the IDRiM Book Series

These activities, which were designed to be cross-disciplinary and international,

have seen synergistic developments. Japan’s accumulated knowledge, led by DPRI,

became merged with IIASA’s extensive expertise and became connected with inputs

from the USA, the UK, other parts of Europe, Asia, and other countries and regions.

Major Research Contributions

Among many, the following contributions merit mention:

Conceptual Models Developed and Shared for Integrated Disaster Risk

Management Okada (2012) proposed systematic conceptual models for under-

standing the Machizukuri (citizen-led community management) approach. Figure 1

illustrates the multilayer common spaces (an extension of the concept of infrastruc-

ture) for a city, region, or neighborhood community as a living body (Okada 2004).

This conceptual model has been found to be useful to address multilayer issues of

integrated disaster risk management at various scales. For example, in the context of

this diagram, Machizukuri is more appropriately applied on a neighborhood com-

munity scale rather than on a wider scale, such as a city or region. Applied to a

neighborhood community in the context of a ﬁve-storied pagoda model, it starts

with the ﬁfth layer (daily life), followed by the fourth (land use and built environ-

ment) and the third (infrastructure). By comparison, Toshikeikaku (urban planning)

focuses mainly on the fourth and third layers. Another point of contrast is that

Machizukuri requires citizen involvement to induce attitudinal or behavioral

change, while this issue is not essential for Toshikeikaku.

Fig. 1 Five-storied pagoda model (Source: Okada 2006)

Foreword to the IDRiM Book Series

Economic Modeling of Disaster Damage/Loss and Economic

Resiliency Extensive research has been carried out by Tatano et al. (2004, 2007)

and Tatano and Tsuchiya (2008) to model and analyze economic impacts of disrup-

tions to lifelines and infrastructure systems caused by a large-scale disaster. For

instance, simulating a hypothetical Tokai–Tonankai earthquake in Japan, a spatial

computable general equilibrium (SCGE) model was constructed to integrate a

transportation model that can estimate two types of interregional ﬂows of freight

movement and passenger trips. Kajitani and Tatano (2009) investigated a method

for estimating the production capacity loss rate (PCLR) of industrial sectors dam-

aged by a disaster to include resilience among manufacturing sectors. PCLR is fun-

damental information required to gain an understanding of economic losses caused

by a disaster. In particular, this paper proposed a method of PCLR estimation that

considered the two main causes of capacity losses as observed from past earthquake

disasters, namely, damage to production facilities and disruption of lifeline systems.

To achieve the quantitative estimation of PCLR, functional fragility curves for the

relationship between production capacity, earthquake ground motion, and lifeline

resilience factors for adjusting the impact of lifeline disruptions were adopted,

while historical recovery curves were applied to damaged facilities.

Disaster Reduction-Oriented Community Workshop Methods The Cross-Road

game developed by Yamori et al. (2007) proceeds as follows. During a game ses-

sion, a group of ﬁve players read 10–20 episodes that are presented on cards one at

a time. Each episode is derived from extensive focus group interviews of disaster

veterans of the GHQ and describes a severe dilemma that the veterans of Kobe actu-

ally faced. Individual players are required to make an either/or decision (i.e., yes or

no) between two conﬂicting alternatives in order to deal with the dilemma.

The Yonmenkaigi System Method (YSM) by Okada et al. (2013a, b) is a unique

participatory decision- and action-taking workshop method. It is composed of four

main steps: conducting a strength–weakness–opportunity–threat (SWOT) analysis,

completing the Yonmenkaigi chart, debating, and presenting the group’s action

plan. The YSM is an implementation- and collaboration-oriented approach that

incorporates the synergistic process of mutual learning, decision-making, and

capacity building. It fosters small and modest breakthroughs and/or innovative

strategy development. The YSM addresses issues of resource management and

mobilization, as well as effective involvement and commitment by participants, and

provides a strategic communication platform for participants.

Collaborative Research and Education Schemes Based on the Case Station-

Field Campus (CASiFiCA) Scheme Acknowledging that diverse efforts have

been made for disaster reduction, particularly in disaster-prone areas (countries),

many professionals have been energetically and devotedly engaged in ﬁeld work to

reduce disaster risks. They recognize also that more community-based stakeholder-

involved approaches are needed. A crucial question arises as to why we cannot

Foreword to the IDRiM Book Series