Abstract
Nepal and Japan, both are multi-hazard prone countries having experience of devastating disasters. It is difficult, if not impossible, to stop natural hazard events at source. However, the impact can be reduced significantly by preventing them from turning into disasters. The impact of disasters can vary depending on the capacity to handle the situation; and the capacity depends on the level of preparedness and mitigation measures taken in advance. Japan has set example for the rest of the world when it comes to Disaster Risk Management (DRM). Recovery and reconstruction after disasters are not just to develop the area as it was earlier, but it has to be taken as an opportunity for developing better than earlier, which is called as “Build Back Better”. This concept was raised by Japanese Government in UN World conference, Sendai in 2015 [1]. Dynamic, evolutionary and proactive DRM policy and plans with innovation, and the use of science and technology to find solutions, and effective implementation of the policy and plans, coupled with the culture of safety among the citizens, and the spirit of never give up “Nana KarobiYa Oki” (Seven times fall down, Eight times get up), are the unique features that every country should learn from Japan’s DRM mechanism. This paper is an effort to buy-in the good practices from Japan to improve DRM system in Nepal. It is a product of three-month intensive research in the University of Tokyo under a PhD research that consisted of reviewing existing DRM documents and several interactive meetings with stakeholders in Japan.
Highlights
Hundreds of thousands of lives are being lost globally due to natural hazard events and a huge loss amounting US$1.5 trillion has been lost during the last decade alone, and this trend is continuing as exposure in hazard-prone countries grow more rapidly than vulnerability which is reduced [2]
The natural hazard events will occur naturally; nobody can stop at source, but the level of impact can be significantly varied depending on the level of preparedness, mitigation measures and response capacity, and as a whole effectiveness of Disaster Risk Management (DRM) mechanism
A study carried out by GeoHazard International, United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD) shows that a person living in Kathmandu is about 60 times more likely to be killed by earthquake than a person living in Tokyo [6]
Summary
Hundreds of thousands of lives are being lost globally due to natural hazard events and a huge loss amounting US$1.5 trillion has been lost during the last decade alone, and this trend is continuing as exposure in hazard-prone countries grow more rapidly than vulnerability which is reduced [2]. In the context of Japan, the Government has considered as the national priorities to protect the country’s land, saving lives of its people, livelihood and property from disasters [4] Further it has made a significant investment for reducing risk rather than spending more in emergency response activities after disasters, good example of investing 51 percent in “mitigation and preparedness” of the total disaster-related project budgets was done during 1990-2010 [1]. Though Japan has a quite long history of disaster management policy development, the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act was a turning point for strengthening disaster management system when it came into effect in 1961 after the 1959 Ise-wan Typhoon killing 5098 people This act clearly defines the roles and responsibilities for federal government and develops acumulative and organized disaster prevention structures [4]. After the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquake, revisions were made mainly on the Basic Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction; the Guide to Preparing Detailed and Practical Evacuation Plans in Case of Volcanic Eruption and the Guidelines for Evacuation recommendations [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
