We should consider countermeasures against natural disasters
and way of reconstruction after disasters
from the viewpoints of sustainability of the environment.
After the experiences of several earthquakes, the concept of countermeasures
against earthquake disaster for preparedness, mitigation and reconstruction
is changing to the way of thinking respecting ecological attitude and symbiosis
from its preoccupation with the wholehearted belief of simple safety technology.
In this concept the balance of symbiotic thinking and safety engineering is important.
We (Kobe University COE=Center of Excellence) call it as Symbiotic Safety.
Considering countermeasures against natural disasters,
From the viewpoints of sustainability of the environment…
Is the safety engineering appropriate for mitigation and reconstruction?
Camp of Provisional Houses
Fireproof High Rise Housing Complex
Too wide Road Network
Scrap and Build Redevelopment
Steep Ridged Dike /Levee
Isn’t that solution causing a possibility of another
disaster or destruction of environment?
Is that solution considering the sustainability of
local community and economy?
Is that really the comprehensive solution
of the environment?
Symbiosis has two meanings.
One is symbiosis with society (of diverse subjects=people.)
The other is symbiosis with environment.
Both ecological attitudes are important.
Symbiotic Safety with society means
we should involve the community of diverse people and empower it against disaster.
When we have a basis on the community we can do better to prepare for
and mitigate the disaster and reconstruct the environment after the disaster,
rebuilding the lives smoothly.
Symbiotic Safety with environment means
we should prepare for and prevent the disaster
not destroying the nature and applying the energy of nature.
And it also means reconstruction after the disaster should be done
by the way not destroying the continuity of environment,
upon it community and local economy rely.
Participation of Diverse Subjects,
Sustainability and Continuity of Local Society, Harmonious Community, Synergetic Effect of Residents’ Cooperation.
Safety and Stability of Regional Environment, Optimization of Land-Use of Wider Area, Application of Engineering in Ecological Manner, Absorption of Destructive Energy, Applying Energy of Nature.
Great Hanshin-Awaji (Kobe) Earthquake happened in very center of high dense urban area so the victims and damages are so big.
The reconstruction process is full of lessons.
Despite success in quick recovery of infrastructure, lifelines, public facilities and significant buildings,
about the continuity of community there were many mistakes.
Just after the earthquake the cooperation of community and volunteers from outsides worked very well to rescue the people and lead them to evacuation centers set up in local schools which had get less damages because of the high earthquake resistant standard.
200,000 provisional houses and public apartments were quickly build ignoring the original community which made another suffer to weak people.
Those shelters were built in public owned vacant lots in very distant areas far from the original community of sufferers and the residents were recruited each by each as lottery so the community which strengthened after the disaster having made autonomous solidarity was destroyed and shuffled.
Misfortune happened frequently such as solitude death or suicide.
There was few news of good episode.
Enormous Amount of Rubble as Wastes
→ Reclamation to sea and mountain volleys
(Destruction of Nature)
→ Increase of Demand of Housing in a Short Period
( Rising Cost / Low Quality Construction)
City planning also made mistakes to try to introduce too gigantic change to traditional dense area by redevelopment. It took years to realize (more than a decade in some cases.) The result is enough to kill the continuity and local industries. On the other hand in the area where government did minimum in city planning and prepared many subsidies and left the possibilities of choice to private self-help reconstruction, communities and industries going well. Also in the areas where government and community took time to discuss to decide the reconstruction plan, results were good.
City planning also made mistakes to try to introduce too gigantic change to traditional dense area by redevelopment. It took years to realize (more than a decade in some cases.) The result is enough to kill the continuity and local industries. On the other hand in the area where government did minimum in city planning and prepared many subsidies and left the possibilities of choice to private self-help reconstruction, communities and industries going well. Also in the areas where government and community took time to discuss to decide the reconstruction plan, results were good.
In 2004/10/23 Chuetsu Earthquake happened in Niigata prefecture Japan,
although the dead victims were not so many as Hanshin-Awaji case
but wide damages were left in topography and infrastructures in rural area.
Many villages were isolated because of the loss of approaches.
Chuetsu EQ, 2004 10 23. (Magnitude 6.8, Seismic Intensity 7)
(dead victims 65persons, 4,805 injured, House Collapsed 16,000.)
Some of the new damages happened in Chuetsu , as river channel blockades and splits of access to villages by big landslides just as same phenomena happened in Sichuan EQ 2008. Lack of non damaged public buildings for evacuation center was one of the new problems in Japan. It became a good opportunity to look over the disaster in rural area.
We should build well preparedness for disaster in rural area.
Public buildings should be highly resistant against earthquake, such as government, hospital and school . Because they are important as emergency or evacuation centers.
Logistics, correspondence tools and means, stock of gears for emergency and medical care systems for the isolated villages must be considered.
At the reconstruction process we should respect the original community or hamlet as the base of the recovery and continuity of the society.
When we make the reconstruction plan, we should deliberate not to harm the continuity of environment as it is the basis of the sustainability of society, local industry and livelihood of the suffered people.
The reconstruction process should be done carefully to the regional and cultural features of environment, never to be too gigantic.
Through the experience of recent earthquakes and natural disasters in this decade
several points as below towards symbiosis were emphasized by specialists as the reflections of Hanshin-Awaji to consider the reconstruction.
1. Continuity of Community
2. Participation of People in Decision Making and Support of Specialist for them
3. Support for Repairing the Housing Stocks
4. Rebuilding of the Daily Lives of Sufferers, Livelihoods and Industries
5. Fixing and Succession of Townscape (Landscape) and Cultural Heritages
“Community Based Reconstruction” after the Central Java Earthquake
The Central Java Earthquake (Magnitude 6.2~6.3) happened in 2006/05/27
in the area near Jogjakarta in Indonesia.
The damage is very big as 156,000 houses were heavily damaged and 5,716 persons were killed.
Here the reconstruction process is going well with the slogan of “Gotong-Royong” that means
“Community Based Reconstruction”.
This idea is based on the lessons and reflection of the reconstruction process of Ache case
(Great Sumatra EQ 2004.)
In Ache the damage were so huge and enormous aids from the countries and NGOs of the world
gathered and built many housings in the area without infrastructures having made
a big confusion in local community.
1 Rebuilding of Housing on very original site
In most cases the ground is not damaged and the damaged houses are detached.
Premises had certain room.
2 POKMAS= neighborhood by 10~15 households
The aids (finance and facilitator) were given to it.
Distribution and management is entrusted to the Pokmas members.
3 People’s Participation in Decision Making and Specialists’ Aid
The Decision making to make a reconstruction plan is done
by POKMAS and Village level by peoples’ discussion with facilitators.
4 Self Build and Building Standard Education on Site
Most of the houses were built by self help of villagers with a few trained workers.
On site specialist and students instructed directly distributing documents and graphics.
5 Recycle of Debris
The Debris from rubbles was recycled by crushing used as aggregates.
6 Core House and Gradual Reconstruction
Core House (6mX6m= 36sqm) was recommended
that means starting life in small house and expand it gradually.
Conclusion:
The safety of regional space is obtained through symbiosis.
We call it Symbiotic Safety.
We can make tough (resilient) regional space against natural and social disaster, pursuing ecological city/village that co-exists with nature, creating universal environment where people can live cooperatively together.
Only through this way we can contribute to realize sustainable society and environment.
We should change our concept
from the Safety supported by the distributive technology
to the Comprehensive Safety supported by whole society
from the technology of Conquering Nature
to the technology of Symbiosis with Nature
Thank you very much for your attention!
謝謝 您們的垂聞！
