Learning from the disasters in the world
YANAGISAWA Kae / Vice President, Japan International Cooperation Agency
April 17, 2015
From March 14 through 18, 2015, the Third United Nations Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction was held in Sendai City, Japan. The conference, attended by representatives from 187 UN member states, UN and other international organizations, NGOs and civil society organizations, adopted the "Sendai Declaration" and the "Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030". The participants of the conference had opportunities to visit areas around Sendai to observe recovery and reconstruction processes from the devastation of the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunamis in 2011. In fact this was the reason that Japan proposed hosting the conference in Sendai.
Coincidentally, on March 13, just one day before the start of the Conference, a strong cyclone "Pam" hit the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu. 166,000 people, two-thirds of the total population of the country (that is 250,000), were reported to be affected. Good news out of this tragedy was that the death toll as of March 24 was as small as 11. This was attributable to the efforts of the Government of Vanuatu to strengthen weather forecasting and early warning systems as well as pre-emptive evacuation of the population.
The affected people, however, faced enormous difficulties. The most serious issues were water and food. Clean water was lost as the sources were contaminated by the cyclone. This, together with food shortage, was an immense public health concern. More than 110,000 people reportedly lost their houses. Relief activities were extremely challenging as Vanuatu consists of many small islands. Recovery to normalcy would take long.
As we can see from this case, it is not only human lives and property that are lost in disasters; those who have survived also suffer. Therefore countries need to make every effort to reduce negative impacts of natural hazards through preventive measures, and also need to minimize the suffering of the population through sufficient preparation. In reality, however, affected people are often forced to live an unsafe and undignified life for a substantially long time period.
Humanitarian assistance from the international community can play a positive role in reducing the difficulties of the disaster-affected countries. Humanitarian organizations with long history and experience, including the United Nations organizations and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, have been constantly improving the contents and the methods of relief activities so that better assistance is provided. These efforts include establishing frameworks for promoting information sharing and coordination among humanitarian actors.
However, humanitarian assistance is not free from criticism. The practice of sending unsolicited goods never ends. Humanitarian organizations tend to prioritize visibility in choosing the sites of operations so that their activities are broadcast or reported in their home countries, leaving remote areas unattended. Coordination among international humanitarian organizations are often made without involving host governments, or coordination meetings are held in a language, i.e. English, that the officials of the host governments do not understand. Furthermore, in many cases assisting governments see disasters as opportunities for promoting diplomatic relations with affected countries, and even compete with each other in the speed and the quantity of assistance.
With these negative aspects, humanitarian assistance may impose extra burden on affected countries, despite the best of intentions on the donor's part. Disaster-affected states need to understand this risk and exercise their wisdom in accepting international humanitarian assistance with clear strategy.
Looking back at the situations in the aftermath of the Great East Japan Earthquake, support to the affected population was far from ideal. The affected people were forced to stay in evacuation centers in longer periods than any time before, without sufficient privacy and specific care for women, the elderly, people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. Sanitation and nutrition conditions were also poor. International assistance, which was offered by more than 160 countries, was received in a reactive manner without clear announcement of preferred goods and services.
This tells us that even an advanced country like Japan may face difficulties in responding to an unprecedented and unimagined crisis. Experience is the key to cope with these shortcomings. Unfortunately, however, the number of disasters that a person may experience in his/her lifetime, either as a disaster victim or a responder, is limited. The only way to fill this gap is to learn lessons from other countries' experiences and strengthen imaginative thinking. It is desired that Japan, while extending humanitarian assistance to countries stricken by disasters, learn how the societies and the population are affected and apply the lessons in responding to its own disasters.
Kae Yanagisawa is Vice President of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
Coincidentally, on March 13, just one day before the start of the Conference, a strong cyclone "Pam" hit the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu. 166,000 people, two-thirds of the total population of the country (that is 250,000), were reported to be affected. Good news out of this tragedy was that the death toll as of March 24 was as small as 11. This was attributable to the efforts of the Government of Vanuatu to strengthen weather forecasting and early warning systems as well as pre-emptive evacuation of the population.
The affected people, however, faced enormous difficulties. The most serious issues were water and food. Clean water was lost as the sources were contaminated by the cyclone. This, together with food shortage, was an immense public health concern. More than 110,000 people reportedly lost their houses. Relief activities were extremely challenging as Vanuatu consists of many small islands. Recovery to normalcy would take long.
As we can see from this case, it is not only human lives and property that are lost in disasters; those who have survived also suffer. Therefore countries need to make every effort to reduce negative impacts of natural hazards through preventive measures, and also need to minimize the suffering of the population through sufficient preparation. In reality, however, affected people are often forced to live an unsafe and undignified life for a substantially long time period.
Humanitarian assistance from the international community can play a positive role in reducing the difficulties of the disaster-affected countries. Humanitarian organizations with long history and experience, including the United Nations organizations and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, have been constantly improving the contents and the methods of relief activities so that better assistance is provided. These efforts include establishing frameworks for promoting information sharing and coordination among humanitarian actors.
However, humanitarian assistance is not free from criticism. The practice of sending unsolicited goods never ends. Humanitarian organizations tend to prioritize visibility in choosing the sites of operations so that their activities are broadcast or reported in their home countries, leaving remote areas unattended. Coordination among international humanitarian organizations are often made without involving host governments, or coordination meetings are held in a language, i.e. English, that the officials of the host governments do not understand. Furthermore, in many cases assisting governments see disasters as opportunities for promoting diplomatic relations with affected countries, and even compete with each other in the speed and the quantity of assistance.
With these negative aspects, humanitarian assistance may impose extra burden on affected countries, despite the best of intentions on the donor's part. Disaster-affected states need to understand this risk and exercise their wisdom in accepting international humanitarian assistance with clear strategy.
Looking back at the situations in the aftermath of the Great East Japan Earthquake, support to the affected population was far from ideal. The affected people were forced to stay in evacuation centers in longer periods than any time before, without sufficient privacy and specific care for women, the elderly, people with disabilities and other vulnerable groups. Sanitation and nutrition conditions were also poor. International assistance, which was offered by more than 160 countries, was received in a reactive manner without clear announcement of preferred goods and services.
This tells us that even an advanced country like Japan may face difficulties in responding to an unprecedented and unimagined crisis. Experience is the key to cope with these shortcomings. Unfortunately, however, the number of disasters that a person may experience in his/her lifetime, either as a disaster victim or a responder, is limited. The only way to fill this gap is to learn lessons from other countries' experiences and strengthen imaginative thinking. It is desired that Japan, while extending humanitarian assistance to countries stricken by disasters, learn how the societies and the population are affected and apply the lessons in responding to its own disasters.
Kae Yanagisawa is Vice President of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
他国の災害に学ぶ
柳沢 香枝 / 国際協力機構理事
2015年 4月 17日
3月14日から18日の間、仙台で第3回国連世界防災会議が開催された。会議には187ヶ国の政府を始め、国際機関、NGO、市民社会等の代表が参加し、「仙台宣言」と「災害リスク軽減に向けた仙台枠組」が採択された。会議参加者は、仙台周辺の２０１１年の東日本大震災・津波の被災地域の復旧・復興状況を視察する機会を得た。このことが、日本が今回の会議を仙台で開くことを提案した理由でもある。
折しも会議前日の3月13日、大洋州の島嶼国であるバヌアツをサイクロン「パム」が襲い、約16万6,000人が被災するという大きな被害をもたらした。バヌアツの全人口は約25万人であり、実にその6割以上が被災したことになる。不幸中の幸いと言えるのは、死者が11人（3月24日現在）と少数にとどまったことである。その背景にはバヌアツ政府が進めてきた気象予報とそれに基づく住民の避難行動があったとされている。
他方、被災者の状況は困難を極めている。中でも水と食糧の問題が深刻である。サイクロンにより水源が汚染され、清潔な水の入手が困難となり、また食糧の不足も深刻で、住民の健康への影響が懸念されている。家を失った住民も11万人以上いるとされている。多くの小島からなる国家という特性が、救援をより難しいものにしている。被災者の生活が元に戻るには長い時間がかかるだろう。
災害は人命や財産を奪うだけでなく、生き残った人々にも大きな苦難を与える。防災により自然の脅威から受ける影響を少なくする努力はもちろんのこと、災害被害が発生した場合にも、住民の苦痛をできるだけ少なくするための備えが必要だ。しかしバヌアツの例に見るように、多くの国で被災者は長く困難な状況に置かれることが多い。
被災国の苦難を軽減するため、国際社会からの人道支援は大きな役割を果たすことができる。国連機関や国際赤十字・赤新月社連盟（IFRC）始め、長い経験を持つ人道支援機関は、支援の内容や方法にも改善を加え、より良い支援を行う努力を続けている。その中には、人道支援組織間の情報共有や調整を促進するための枠組みも含まれている。
しかし国際的な人道支援に対する批判も常に存在する。被災地で必要とされない物資が送られる例は後を絶たない。また母国でのメディアへの露出を意識して、目立つ場所に支援が集中する結果、遠隔地に支援が届かないという例もある。人道支援組織の間の調整が被災国政府を巻き込まずに行われたり、被災国の役人が理解できない言語（英語）で行われたりするという事例も多い。更に、各国政府の中には災害を外交上の好機ととらえ、支援を競い合うという風潮も見受けられる。
人道支援は、その動機となっている善意とは裏腹に、被災国に大きな負担を与えかねない。支援を受け入れる側はその弊害もよく理解し、主体性をもって「賢く」受入れることが必要だ。
翻って日本の状況はどうだろうか。東日本大震災の折、被災者は過去に例のない長期の避難生活を強いられたが、その生活はプライバシーの確保、衛生、栄養等の面で理想とはほど遠いものだったとされている。また国際的な支援についても、160を超える国からの申し入れに対し、受け身的な対応に終始した感が否めない。
先進国日本でも、「想定を超える」事態への対応には多くの困難が伴った。災害への対応には、経験がものを言う。しかし1人の人間が（被災者としてではなく、支援者としても）実際に経験する災害の数は限られている。この不足を補うためには、他国の例を見て、学び、想像力を高めるしかない。日本も、国際的な災害人道支援を展開すると同時に、そこから学び、自国の災害対応に活かしていくことが望まれる。
（筆者は国際協力機構理事）
折しも会議前日の3月13日、大洋州の島嶼国であるバヌアツをサイクロン「パム」が襲い、約16万6,000人が被災するという大きな被害をもたらした。バヌアツの全人口は約25万人であり、実にその6割以上が被災したことになる。不幸中の幸いと言えるのは、死者が11人（3月24日現在）と少数にとどまったことである。その背景にはバヌアツ政府が進めてきた気象予報とそれに基づく住民の避難行動があったとされている。
他方、被災者の状況は困難を極めている。中でも水と食糧の問題が深刻である。サイクロンにより水源が汚染され、清潔な水の入手が困難となり、また食糧の不足も深刻で、住民の健康への影響が懸念されている。家を失った住民も11万人以上いるとされている。多くの小島からなる国家という特性が、救援をより難しいものにしている。被災者の生活が元に戻るには長い時間がかかるだろう。
災害は人命や財産を奪うだけでなく、生き残った人々にも大きな苦難を与える。防災により自然の脅威から受ける影響を少なくする努力はもちろんのこと、災害被害が発生した場合にも、住民の苦痛をできるだけ少なくするための備えが必要だ。しかしバヌアツの例に見るように、多くの国で被災者は長く困難な状況に置かれることが多い。
被災国の苦難を軽減するため、国際社会からの人道支援は大きな役割を果たすことができる。国連機関や国際赤十字・赤新月社連盟（IFRC）始め、長い経験を持つ人道支援機関は、支援の内容や方法にも改善を加え、より良い支援を行う努力を続けている。その中には、人道支援組織間の情報共有や調整を促進するための枠組みも含まれている。
しかし国際的な人道支援に対する批判も常に存在する。被災地で必要とされない物資が送られる例は後を絶たない。また母国でのメディアへの露出を意識して、目立つ場所に支援が集中する結果、遠隔地に支援が届かないという例もある。人道支援組織の間の調整が被災国政府を巻き込まずに行われたり、被災国の役人が理解できない言語（英語）で行われたりするという事例も多い。更に、各国政府の中には災害を外交上の好機ととらえ、支援を競い合うという風潮も見受けられる。
人道支援は、その動機となっている善意とは裏腹に、被災国に大きな負担を与えかねない。支援を受け入れる側はその弊害もよく理解し、主体性をもって「賢く」受入れることが必要だ。
翻って日本の状況はどうだろうか。東日本大震災の折、被災者は過去に例のない長期の避難生活を強いられたが、その生活はプライバシーの確保、衛生、栄養等の面で理想とはほど遠いものだったとされている。また国際的な支援についても、160を超える国からの申し入れに対し、受け身的な対応に終始した感が否めない。
先進国日本でも、「想定を超える」事態への対応には多くの困難が伴った。災害への対応には、経験がものを言う。しかし1人の人間が（被災者としてではなく、支援者としても）実際に経験する災害の数は限られている。この不足を補うためには、他国の例を見て、学び、想像力を高めるしかない。日本も、国際的な災害人道支援を展開すると同時に、そこから学び、自国の災害対応に活かしていくことが望まれる。
（筆者は国際協力機構理事）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟