Content uploaded by Shigeo Tatsuki
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Shigeo Tatsuki on Dec 30, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Challenges in Counter-disaster Measures for
People with Functional Needs in Times of
Disaster Following the Great East Japan
Earthquake
SHIGEO TATSUKI
Abstract: This article describes the three major challenges that were identified
and their possible solutions are proposed in counter-disaster measures for
“people with functional needs in times of disaster (PFND)” following the 2011
Great East Japan Earthquake. First, recent developments in preparedness mea-
sures for PFND in Japan have been uncritically relying on the assumption that
hazard maps represent “correct” estimates of future hazardous events, which
are based on the maximum probable event (MPrE) framework. In reality,
however, a maximum possible event (MPoE) has occurred in the To
¯
hoku regions.
This has tremendous implications for fundamentally re-thinking the entire hazard
estimation process from a MPrEtoMP
oE framework. Second, counter-disaster
measures for PFND have focused mainly on warning and neighborhood-based
evacuation assistance activities. Needs for shelters and temporary housing units
that were specially designated for PFND arose following the earthquake.
However, their provisions were neither systematic nor universal due to the lack
of pre-planning. More detailed guidelines for specially designated shelter and
temporary housing operations need to be developed in order to address this
issue. Third, people with disabilities (PWD) became invisible in shelters and
communities or in the eyes of local government administrators. This was due to
the fact that a majority of PWD did not ask for help in evacuation shelters
because they felt general shelters were not “barrier free” and were unrespon-
sive to their functional needs. Furthermore, many local government administra-
tors felt hesitant to release their PFND registry to non-governmental and self-help
organizations that were eager to check the whereabouts and current situations of
PWD. This was due to the fear of breaking the Personal Information Protection
Bylaw despite the fact that the bylaw provided exceptional conditions, where the
onset of disaster was clearly one of these exceptional conditions. Further elabo-
ration and education on the use of personal information of PFND during a disaster
period is needed among public and local government administrators.ijjs_1158 12..20
Keywords: people with functional needs in times of disaster, maximum probable
event, maximum possible event
bs_bs_banner
International Journal of Japanese Sociology doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6781.2012.01158.x
2012, Number 21
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
Introduction
Counter-disaster Measures for People
with Functional Needs in Times of
Disaster in Japan
The issue of people with functional needs
for communication, medical care, maintain-
ing functional independence, supervision,
and transportation (Kailes and Enders,
2007) during disasters has gained significant
attention since 2004 when a series of natural
disasters hit the Japanese archipelago. These
disasters included the July Niigata-
Fukushima flood, the October typhoon 23
and the October Niigata Chuetsu earth-
quake, wherein notably more than 60% of
the victims were over the age of 65. As a
response to these tragedies, Japan’s Cabinet
Office established a committee on “Com-
municating Disaster Information and
Evacuation and Sheltering Assistance for
the Elderly and Other Population during
Heavy Meteorological and Other Disas-
ters.” The committee published the first
edition of the “Evacuation/Sheltering Assis-
tance Guideline for People with Functional
Needs in Times of Disaster” in March 2005.
After the guideline publication, the term
saigaiji-youengosha or “people with func-
tional needs in times of disaster (PFND)”
was popularized in place of saigai-jakusha
or “disaster-vulnerable population.” PFND
is defined as “a person who is able to func-
tion daily, whereby living independently
given the proper resources and services
when necessary.”
Following another series of heavy rainfall,
flood and landslide disasters in the subse-
quent year of 2005, another Cabinet Office
committee conducted field research on the
2005 meteorological disaster sites and
revised the evacuation and sheltering assis-
tance guideline in March 2006. The 2006
guideline emphasized: (i) establishing a
special team in each municipal government
that was in charge of coordinating assistance
to the target population; (ii) encouraging
the information sharing of the functional
needs population within the local govern-
ment and, if possible, with local community
organizations, such as neighborhood asso-
ciations and community emergency and
response team; and (iii) planning. Since the
publication of the 2006 guideline and the
2007 report, the Fire and Disaster Manage-
ment Agency (FDMA) has requested every
municipality in the country to formulate its
own master plan that directs policy forma-
tion on PFND assistance, to identify poten-
tial target groups, and to clarify ways to
collect and share their personal informa-
tion. Based on the master plan, municipali-
ties have been further encouraged to start
project planning to assign local resident
helpers to each individual PFND in times of
evacuation. According to the survey con-
ducted by FDMA, as of 1 April 2011, 1262
out of 1622 municipalities (76.8%) com-
pleted formulating PFND assistance master
plans and an additional 349 municipalities
(21.2%) were expected to finish within 1
year. Similarly, 864 (52.6%) municipalities
reported that they have finished creating
and have been updating the PFND direc-
tory. A total of 684 (41.5%) municipalities
said that they were currently in the process
of making the directories. Municipalities
have also been working hard even on
assigning local residents/helpers to each
PFND for evacuation, which is a time-
consuming process. A total of 361 (22.0%)
reported that they have completed the
assignment, 998 (60.7%) are in the process,
and 285 (17.3%) have not yet initiated the
process (Fire and Disaster Management
Agency, 2011).
In the following fiscal year of 2006, the
committee on PFND continued working on
more detailed procedures and workflows in
order to collect and share information on
PFND, and to make individualized evacua-
tion and sheltering assistance plans. In
March 2007, the committee published the
“Report on Preparedness Procedures for
PFND.” The 2007 report emphasized the
establishment of a system to assist PFND by
People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster 13
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
facilitating cooperation between the local/
municipal government disaster manage-
ment department and its health and welfare
department. The role of the disaster man-
agement department is to provide local
hazard information, while the health and
welfare department provides information
on potential vulnerabilities within the target
population. The 2007 report encouraged the
use of maps where potentially vulnerable
individuals, such as the frail elderly and
people with disabilities (PWD) were pro-
jected onto multiple hazard layers, such as
flood, landslide and seismicity. The map can
help identify those who are at more risk
because of their functional needs as well as
of their geographic locations.
Kobe PFND Mapping Project
Tatsuki and Comafay (2010) reported on
the 2008 Kobe PFND Mapping Project,
which was characterized by a combined use
of geographic information system and social
survey in order to assess the overall hazard
vulnerability of PFND. In response to the
FDMA request as explained above, the
Kobe city administration (responsible for
1.5 million residents) collated separate
social service recipient databases, resulting
in an integrated registry involving 120 000
individuals who were considered to be
potentially vulnerable in times of disaster.
The registry database identified 4329 people
with physical disabilities in Hyogo Ward,
which has 107 000 residents. The 2008
project geocoded and mapped those with
physical disabilities on landslide, flood and
tsunami hazard layers. A total of 914 indi-
viduals were found residing in hazardous
areas (see Fig. 1).
These 914 individuals were then visited by
interviewers and 612 or 67% responded to a
structured questionnaire which measured
demographics (i.e., age and sex), levels of
disability, social isolation, housing fragility,
and physical immobility. The 2008 project
was based on the person-in-environment
model of vulnerability, which defined hazard
vulnerability (V) as a function of hazards
(H), person (P), and environment (E)
factors, or V =f(H, f(P, E)) as illustrated by
Figure 2.
Based on the model, an overall vulner-
ability score was then calculated as a func-
tion of hazards and the five variables for
each respondent. As a result, 17% of those
who responded were found to be the most
vulnerable and requiring priority assistance
in times of disaster (see Fig. 3).
Furthermore, a social vulnerability-
weighted kernel density map of people with
Figure 1. Persons with disabilities living in
Kobe’s Hyogo ward (n=4411)
HazardLayer
PersonalFactor
EnvironmentalFactor
PxEInteractionFactor
V= ƒ (H, ƒ (P,E))
Overall Vulnerability Map
Figure 2. Person-in-environment model of
mapping hazard vulnerability
Shigeo Tatsuki14
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
functional needs was created (see Fig. 4).
This map indicated which particular areas
require more human resources for assisting
the functional needs population for evacua-
tion and sheltering.The project maps helped
representatives from functional needs
groups, community emergency response
teams, community social services, and
emergency management centers to initiate
evacuation and sheltering assistance plan-
ning in the project areas.
The 2008 Kobe PFND mapping project
was an attempt that aimed to provide a stan-
dardized method using individual social vul-
nerability mapping as an analysis tool to
identify more comprehensively the risks
that could affect a given community. This
could help different stake-holders, func-
tional needs groups, community emergency
response teams, community social services,
and emergency management centers to ini-
tiate evacuation and sheltering assistance
planning in high-risk communities.
Three Challenges in PFND
Counter-disaster Measures
after 11 March 2011
Despite the above-mentioned national and
local efforts on PFND counter-disaster mea-
sures in recent years, serious problems con-
fronted municipalities, communities, PFND
and their families at the onset of the 11
March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake
Disaster. From three reconnaissance mis-
sions conducted by the author’s team in
March and April, at least three major chal-
lenges were identified in preparedness,
response and relief measures for PFND.
Those were, namely: (i) challenges in iden-
tifying people at risk by re-thinking
“correct” hazard estimates;(ii) challenges in
pre-planning specially designated shelters
for people with functional needs; and (iii)
challenges in utilizing personal information
on PFND.Each challenge is explained in the
following sections.
Challenges in Identifying People at
Risk: Re-think “Correct” Hazard
Estimates
Recent developments in preparedness mea-
sures for PFND in Japan have been uncriti-
cally relying on the assumption that hazard
maps represent “correct”estimates of future
hazardous events. As Figure 5 below illus-
trates, this turned out to be a very wrong
assumption. Hazard maps were created
Figure 3. Overall vulnerability scores mapped
on to hazard layers
17
Areal Overall Vulnerability
Flood
Landslide
Tsunami
Figure 4. People with functional needs in times
of disaster kernel density estimation
weighted by overall vulnerability
index
People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster 15
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
according to a maximum probable event
(MPrE) framework. In reality, however, a
maximum possible event (MPoE) occurred
in the To¯ hoku region. This has tremendous
implications for fundamentally re-thinking
the entire hazard estimation process from
an MPrEto an MPoEframework.
In the previous section, the person-in-
environment model of hazard vulnerability
(V) was introduced as a function of hazard
(H), person (P) and environment (E) factors
or V =f(H, f(P, E)). In practice, the hazard
factor was estimated by a maximum prob-
able event framework and therefore the
model could be represented as V =f(MPrE,
f(P, E)).The challenge here is to replace the
maximum probable event hazard estimate
with an alternative hazard estimate by
incorporating a maximum possible event
framework. The modified person-in-
environment model will therefore be repre-
sented as V =f(MPoE,f(P, E)).
Once the hazard estimation endeavor
departs from the realm governed by proba-
bilistic and statistical theorem (i.e., MPrE
framework), it enters into the world of
“hyper-complexity” where “hypothetical
knowledge can no longer be mastered by
mechanical testing rules” (Beck, 1992/1986:
157). Beck (1992/1986) calls this state
“demonopolization of scientific knowledge
claims” (Beck, 1992/1986: 156). The new
maximum possible event framework, there-
fore, will call for “reflexive scientization”
that demands an active coproduction by
every stakeholder in society in such areas as
politics,business and the public, as well as in
the scientific community involved in the
knowledge definition process (Beck, 1992/
1986: 157). The reflexive scientization
process will also demand respect for locally
networked tacit knowledge and the collec-
tive sensibilities of “lay actors” (Wynne,
1996; Mythen, 2004) as well as for the
experts’ formal knowledge and their tech-
nologies. Details of this project need to be
further investigated.
Challenges in Pre-planning Specially
Designated Shelters for People with
Functional Needs
As was described in the introduction,
counter-disaster measures for PFND have
been focusing mainly on warning and
neighborhood-based evacuation assistance
activities. Needs for shelters and temporary
housing units that were specially designated
for PFND arose following the 11 March
earthquake. However, their provisions were
neither systematic nor universal due to the
lack of pre-planning.This is partly due to the
fact that the 2006 guideline and the 2007
report have not provided detailed proce-
dures on sheltering assistance planning for
PFND.The concept of a specially designated
shelter for PFND, or fukushi-hinansho,
emerged in 2004 from the discussions by the
committee on “Communicating Disaster
Information and Evacuation and Sheltering
Assistance for the Elderly and Other Popu-
lation during Heavy Meteorological and
Other Disasters.” It was recognized that
general evacuation shelters as shown in Fig-
ures 6 and 7 were not capable of responding
to the functional needs of PWD and the frail
elderly. The committees on PFND assis-
tance, however, have not spent enough time
on clarifying the requirements,or the proce-
dures and guidelines for specially desig-
nated shelters. Most hazards that the PFND
Figure 5. Tsunami hazard map and actual
inundation east of Rokugo Junior
High School, Wakabayashi Ward,
Sendai City
Shigeo Tatsuki16
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
committees have been studying since 2004
have been meteorological and therefore
sheltering needs were short-term and con-
sidered less life-threatening than evacuation
needs.
In the 11 March earthquake disaster, a
very large number of people rushed to
general shelters and the length of stay was
long, creating high functional needs for
PFND. The situation apparently required
alternative shelters. Disaster-hit municipali-
ties responded in a non-uniform manner. In
the case of Sendai City, the city administra-
tion had already made pre-planned
arrangements/compacts for an alternative
sheltering service with 52 local social service
providers prior to the March event. Some of
those compacted shelters conducted study
seminars and practice drills in the previous
year. Thanks to these preparations, some
responded to the city administration request
quickly and others voluntarily initiated shel-
tering operations. In total, 26 shelters oper-
ated and served about 260 individuals in
Sendai City (see Fig. 8).
The downtown center of Ishinomaki City
was badly damaged by the March 11
tsunami, forcing more than 30 000 people or
about one-fifth of its population to evacuate
to general shelters at the peak of the
aftermath. A medical doctor helping at one
of the large general shelters strongly
demanded that the city administration
provide an alternative shelter for the frail
elderly, PWD and those outpatients who did
not require intensive medical care from the
Ishinomaki Red Cross Hospital, unaffected
by the tsunami. The city temporally desig-
nated Inai Junior High School gym as a des-
ignated shelter and then later moved the
20–30 shelter occupants to Yugakukan
Sport Center gym (see Fig. 9) on 29 March.
Yugakukan gym eventually accepted about
130 people, including PFND and their
family members. Yugakukan shelter was
staffed initially by most of Ishinomaki
Municipal Hospital’s doctors, nurses and
social workers,who lost their workplace due
to the tsunami. Volunteer doctors, nurses,
social workers, nursing care workers and
public administrators from other prefec-
Figure 6. School Gym Shelter at Rokugo Junior
High School, Sendai City (6 April
2011)
Figure 7. Arahama residents in the first-floor
classroom at Hakken Junior High
School (6 April 2011)
Figure 8. Specially designated shelter at
Miyagino Day Service Center for
people with disabilities, Sendai City
(5 April 2011)
People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster 17
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
tures came to the Yugakukan shelter and
assisted the operation from early April.
It should be noted that Ishinomaki City
was renowned for its citywide community-
based evacuation planning initiatives for
PFND.The city was recognized as one of the
ten model municipalities on PFND pre-
paredness master planning as early as 2004.
By the end of 2010, 401 out of 421 adminis-
trative districts in the city completed indi-
vidualized evacuation planning for each
PFND in the neighborhood. The city’s
master plan for PFND, however, did not
include planning on specially designated
shelters. Inai Junior High School and later
Yugakukan shelter operations were all
improvised by city hospital doctors and
nurses with support from the city. The city,
however, was not aware of the special
service provision clause in the Disaster
Relief Act that qualified additional financial
compensations on top of general service
provisions from the national government. It
was not until almost the end of April that
the city formally designated Yugakukan as
the specially designated shelter for PFND.
To sum up, specially designated shelters
operated in Ishinomaki City but the opera-
tion lacked a formal logistic support foun-
dation for a prolonged period of time.
Like Ishinomaki, more than 12 000 or
one-sixth of the Kesennuma City popula-
tion rushed to general shelters after the
earthquake and tsunami in March. Until
April, the frail elderly, PWD and small chil-
dren were all mixed with other evacuees
who looked after those in need at general
shelters. In some shelters, cardboard parti-
tions were used to separate PFND from
general evacuees in order to provide some
privacy. On 7 April the city administration
officially opened the first specially desig-
nated shelter for PFND in an unused
nursery school site (see Fig. 10). In the
following 2 weeks, an additional four spe-
cially designated shelters were opened.
Shunpo-en special nursing home for the
elderly (see Fig. 10) was one of the four new
specially designated shelters. It was housing
60 elderly residents as well as more than 100
general evacuees and some PFND from the
neighborhood after the March disaster. The
home staff workers cared for the PFND. The
director, however, was afraid of the financial
burden of running a specially designated
shelter for an extended period of time.Later
in April, the city administrators learned that
official designation would allow additional
care service provision under the Disaster
Relief Act.This was on top of the provision
of regular service hours as prescribed by the
Figure 9. Specially designated shelter at
Yugakukan Sport Center Gym,
Ishinomaki City (http://road.nippon-
foundation.or.jp/2011/04/
007-fcd1.html)
Figure 10. Specially designated shelters at
Shunpo-en Special Nursing Home
(top) and Ochiai Nursery School
(bottom) (http://www.toshinkai.or.
jp/image/C8EFBAD2C3CFC7C9B8A
FCAF3B9F0.pdf)
Shigeo Tatsuki18
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
long-term-care insurance scheme. This alle-
viated tremendous financial burdens that
the city and/or the designated shelters, like
the Shunpo-en home, might have had to
bear otherwise. In other words, Kesennum
City also lacked pre-planning on specially
designated shelters and the administration
was not aware of the legal framework (i.e.,
the Disaster Relief Act special service pro-
vision clause) to operate these shelters.
In conclusion, municipalities other than
Sendai City did not have compacts on spe-
cially designated shelter operations with
social service providers. It took nearly 3
weeks for Ishinomaki and Kesennuma to
formally designate such shelters after the
earthquake. It was learned that they were
hesitant because they believed their facili-
ties would not meet the standard for spe-
cially designated shelters, as outlined in
pre-disaster planning manuals.Additionally,
many local officials were unaware of the
special service provision clause of the
Disaster Relief Act covering shelters for
people with functional needs. Nonetheless,
these kinds of sheltering operations did
emerge. Had the local municipalities offici-
ally declared that they were operating
functional-needs shelters, they would have
been eligible for additional resources at the
onset from both the national and prefec-
tural governments.More detailed guidelines
for specially designated shelters and tempo-
rary housing operations for PFND need to
be developed in order to address this issue.
Challenges in Utilizing Personal
Information on PFND
Among different types of PFND, people
with disabilities (PWD) were invisible in
shelters and communities or in the eyes of
local government administrators. This was
due to the fact that the majority of PWD did
not ask for help in general shelters because
they felt general shelters were not “barrier
free” and unresponsive to their functional
needs. Furthermore, many local government
administrators felt hesitant to release the
PFND registry to non-governmental organi-
zations (NGO) and self-help organizations
that were eager to check the whereabouts
and current situation of PWD.This was due
to the fear of breaking the Personal Infor-
mation Protection Bylaw despite the fact
that the bylaw provides exceptional condi-
tions,whereby the onset of disaster is clearly
one of these exceptional conditions. In fact,
Minamisoma City officials did release that
information to a local NGO,and in Higashi-
matsushima, members of groups who
worked on behalf of disabled persons, such
as the Japan Disability Forum, were allowed
to accompany public health nurses on their
home visits. Other cities might have used
similar approaches, but it appeared that in
most affected areas officials were unaware
of the needs of the mentally ill and develop-
mentally disabled persons and had not
attempted to initiate outreach efforts for
these populations. As of June 2011, the
Japan Disability Forum announced that
they were able to meet 1386 PWD in person
from their outreach project in Miyagi Pre-
fecture. This number (1386) accounted for
only 2.6% of 53 511 persons who were reg-
istered as PWD in the affected areas.
Researchers and advocates for persons with
disabilities were unable to determine what
was happening with large numbers of survi-
vors with disabilities. Further elaboration
and education on the use of personal infor-
mation of PFND during a disaster period
are needed among public and local govern-
ment administrators.
Conclusion
This paper first introduced recent develop-
ments on counter-disaster measures for
PFND in Japan. Based on three reconnais-
sance missions in March and April 2011,
three major challenges and their possible
solutions in preparedness, response and
relief measures for PFND were presented.
People with Functional Needs in Times of Disaster 19
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
First, challenges in identifying people at risk
were illustrated. It is suggested here that
there needs to be a shift from a maximum
probable event toamaximum possible event
framework.What Beck (1992/1986) calls the
reflexive scientization process needs to be
envisioned. Second, challenges in operating
specially designated shelters for people with
functional needs were identified. Further
elaboration of the guideline on sheltering
was suggested. Third, challenges in utilizing
personal information on PFND during disas-
ter were presented. Further elaboration and
education on this matter is recommended.
Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the JSPS
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research(A)
titled “The Development of Disaster
Reduction Framework for People with
Functional Needs” (principal investigator
Shigeo Tatsuki).
References
Beck, Ulrich. 1986. Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg
in enne andere Moderne. Frankfurt am Main:
Surbkamp Verlag. (1992, Mark Ritter, trans.,
Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity.
London: Sage).
Fire and Disaster Management Agency. 2011. “A
Research Report on Municipalities’ Counter-
disaster Measures for People with Functional
Needs in Times of Disaster.” (http://
www.fdma.go.jp/neuter/topics/houdou/2307/
230708_1houdou/02_houdoushiryou.pdf,
accessed on 26 September 2011).
Kailes, June Isaacson and Alexandra Enders. 2007.
“Moving beyond ‘Special Needs’: A Function-
Based Framework for Emergency Management
and Planning.” Journal of Disability Policy
Studies 17: 230–237.
Mythen, Gabe. 2004. Ulrich Beck: A Critical Intro-
duction to the Risk Society. London: Pluto
Press.
Tatsuki, Shigeo and Nicolle Comafay. 2010.“Evacu-
ation and Sheltering Assistance Planning for
Special Needs Population:Kobe Disadvantaged
Population Mapping Project.” Presentation for
International Sociological Association World
Congress of Sociology, Gothenburg, Sweden, 15
July 2010.
Wynne, Brian. 1996. “May the Sheep Safely Graze?
A Reflexive View of the Expert–Lay Knowl-
edge Divide.” Pp. 44–83 in Risk, Environment
and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology, edited
by Scott Lash, Bronislaw Szerszynski and Brian
Wynne. London: Sage.
Shigeo Tatsuki
DOSHISHA UNIVERSITY, Karasuma Higashi-iru, Imadegawa-dori, Kamigyo-ku,
Kyoto 602-8580, Japan. Email: statsuki@mail.doshisha.ac.jp
Received 21 December 2011; accepted 26 December 2011.
Shigeo Tatsuki20
© 2012 The Author
International Journal of Japanese Sociology © 2012 The Japan Sociological Society
