Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism
21 November 2014
Kenichiro Tachi Director for International Coordination of River Engineering
Water and Disaster Management Bureau,
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT)
Strengthening the evidence base for
disaster risk management policy analysis
Why is the progress toward mainstreaming Disaster
Risk Management always sluggish?
1
Key Question
Under such a condition, it is crucial to take evidence-
based approach to justify the effects of Disaster Risk
Management policies.
The effects of investment in Disaster Risk Management are
usually unrecognizable. If structures or facilities for Disaster
Risk Management are constructed and work well, it is hard
for citizens to imagine the damage possibly occurred without
the measures. Justifying investment in Disaster Risk
Management always incurs difficulty.
Such approach helps practitioners on the ground do their
jobs!
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
• Background
• Flood Damage Statistics Survey
• Utilization of the Flood Damage Statistics
2. What would be required to justify Disaster Management
investments?
• Precise estimation of possible disaster damages
• Cost-Benefit Analysis
3. Way forward
2
Contents
1. Why baseline data collection
is important?
3
•Actual damage caused by water-related disasters such as floods, landslides, storm surges, tsunamis, etc. is estimated every year. •The survey provides basic data indispensable for presenting the necessity and the effectiveness of flood control measures.
Damages to General Asset
housings, household commodities, machineries for
businesses, agricultural products
Damages to public
Infrastructure
・Cost for
emergency
rehabilitation, etc
Damages to Assets for Public Services
Transportation, communication, etc
4
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
Flood Damage Statistics Survey (since 1961)
Nishi-Biwajima, Aichi in Shinkawa river 5
Tokai Storm of 2000, September 11-13
Total economic loss
771,492 million JPY
87%
1% 11%
1%
General assets
Agriculture
Public infrastructures
Public Services
Obu City and Kariya City, Aichi September 12,2000
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
Utilization of Flood Damage Statistics :
Estimation of Total Economic Loss
The state of the damage to Toyooka Hospital (parking lot) caused by the flooding of the Maruyama River as a result of Typhoon #23 of 2004.1)
6
Typhoon #23, October 2004
Total economic loss
770,910 million JPY
JMA
1) Breach of Maruyama River - Records of Typhoon #23 and verification , Tajima Shikyoku, Kobe Shimbun, Kobe Shimbun Sogo
Shuppan Center, 2005
Yomiuri Shimbun
67% 1%
31%
1%
General assets
Agriculture
Public infrastructures
Public Services
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
Utilization of Flood Damage Statistics :
Estimation of Total Economic Loss
7 Inundation caused by Ikarashi River levee failure (Sanjo City, Niigata Prefecture)
※:Source; Niigata pref.(March 23, 2005)
Large Flood in Niigata inJuly 2004 (15 people died and approx. 21,000 buildings were damaged in Niigata Pref.)
Utilization of Flood Damage Statistics :
Identification of Effects of flood Control Projects
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
8
Shinano River Ikarashi River
River improvements were implemented based on the July 2004 flood experience. Total cost : about 47.1 billion JPY
Measures in response to 2004 Large Flood in Niigata
Shinano River
(September 2008)
(March 2009)
(August 2005)
(December 2010) (September 2010)
Retarding Basin
Shinano River
Excavation
Embankment
Kariyata River
River Improvement Work &
Retarding Basin
Excavation of flood channel by 1-2 m
Retarding basin
River channel
Levee
Improvement Channel widening
and excavation
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
9
○ In July 2011 the Shinano River Basin experienced a total rainfall of approx. 1,000mm, which was the largest rainfall on record and 1.6 times more than that of July 2004, but both damages to buildings and human casualties were reduced dramatically. The investments were successfully justified in the end!
Total Rainfall 1)
2004.7
Total
rainfall
1,006mm
2011.7
Number of Buildings Damaged 2)
9,778
buildings
2004.7
421 buildings
2011.7
90%
reduction
60 %
increase
Number of fatalities or missing 3)
12
persons
2004.7
1 person
2011.7
90%
reduction Total
rainfall
647mm
1)Kasabori rain gauge station 2)2004.7: 「7.13新潟豪雨 水害記録誌(March 2006 Niigata Prefecture) 2011.7: Produced by Niigata Prefecture based on 「第1回平成23年7月新潟・福島豪雨対策検討委員会」 3)Shinano River Downstream, Ikarashi River, Kariyata River Disaster Rehabilitation Emergency Project Pamphlet (Shinano Karyu River Office, Niigata Prefecture)
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
Inundation in Nishibiwajima Town
The case of Heavy Rain in Tokai (2000.9)
670 billion yen
Total losses
Cost of Prevention Measures
120 billion yen
Effectiveness of prevention
550 billion yen
71.6 billion yen of
investment could
have reduce 550
billion yen of
damages
10
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
Estimated losses with prevention measures
Utilization of Flood Damage Statistics :
Identification of Effects of flood Control Projects
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
19
46
19
51
19
56
19
61
19
66
19
71
19
76
19
81
19
86
19
91
19
96
20
01
20
06
Flood Management Cost (Nominal)
GDP (Nominal)
Number of Fatalities
Number of fatalities (people)
Flood manegement cost (Nominal) (hundred of million yen)
GDP(nominal) <billion yen>
<600,000>
<500,000>
<400,000>
<300,000>
<200,000>
<100,000>
<0>
Effect of Flood Management in Japan
*Number of fatalities exclude those who dead by tsunami *GDP : 1980-2009(2000 price), 1946-1979(1990 price)
←
Typ
ho
on
Kat
hle
en
←
Typ
ho
on
Ion
←Ty
ph
oo
n K
itty
←
Typ
ho
on
Jan
e
←
Typ
ho
on
Ru
th
←
Wes
t-Ja
pan
Flo
od
←
Typ
ho
on
To
yam
aru
←Is
ahay
a Fl
oo
d
←Ty
ph
oo
n K
arin
oga
wa
←Ty
ph
oo
n Is
e-B
ay
←
Seco
nd
Typ
ho
on
Mu
roto
←To
kai F
loo
d
←
Typ
ho
on
No
.24
, No
.26
←W
est-
Jap
an W
ater
Dis
aste
r
←
Typ
ho
on
No
.6, N
o.7
, No
.9
←Ty
ph
oo
n N
o.1
7
←
Nag
asak
i Wat
er D
isas
ter
←W
este
rn-S
anin
Wat
er D
isas
ter
←Ty
ph
oo
n N
o.6
, Lan
dsl
ide
in N
agan
o
←
Wes
t-Ja
pan
Wat
er D
isas
ter
←
Typ
ho
on
No
.17
, No
.18
, No
.19
Pyr
ocl
asti
c fl
ow
of
Un
zen
-Fu
gen
-Dak
e ←
Au
gust
Flo
od
in K
yusy
u
←
Deb
ris
Flo
w in
Kag
osh
ima
Har
ihar
a ←
Fuku
shim
a To
chig
i Flo
od
, Ko
chi F
loo
d
←D
ebri
s Fl
ow
in H
iro
shim
a
Ku
mam
oto
Flo
od
Number of Fatalities by Floods , GDP and Budget for Flood Management (2000 price)
Water-related Disasters Statistics in Japan
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
11
Utilization of Flood Damage Statistics :
Identification of Long-term Effects of flood Management Investment
Inundated Area by Floods
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
19
62
19
67
19
72
19
77
19
82
19
87
19
92
19
97
20
02
20
07
Total Inundated Area (10,000ha)
Area of Inundated (Residential & Other Property) (10,000ha)
Inundated area (10,000 ha)
20
10
0
12
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
19
62
19
67
19
72
19
77
19
82
19
87
19
92
19
97
20
02
20
07
Damage to General Assets (10 billion yen)
Area of Inundated (Residential & Other Property) (10,000ha)
Damage to General Assets (2000 Price)
Economic Losses to General Assets
13
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
19
62
19
67
19
72
19
77
19
82
19
87
19
92
19
97
20
02
20
07
Damage to
General Assets
(10 billion yen)
Density of Damage
Cost
(thousand yen / ha)
Total Inundated Area (10,000ha)
Area of Inundated (Residential & Other Property) (10,000ha)
Density of Flood Damage to General Assets
Damage to General Assets (2000 Price)
20 10 0
Inundated area (10,000 ha)
Flood Damage Density (Economic Losses per Area), GDP and Budget for Flood Management (2000 price)
Water-related Disasters Statistics in Japan
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
14
All disaster damage trend in Japan 1990-2009 (2000 price)
0
500
1,000
1,500
house
housing
companies
agri/fishery
housing res
companies res
private total
river
coast/port
sediment
landslide
debris
road/bridge
sewage
park/urban
Year
Billion JPY
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
15
Query and view the survey data
Aggregate, organize, and
screen the survey data
•A general statistics survey based on the article 19 of the Statistics Act (approved by
Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications)
•Carried out by MLIT’s Water and Disaster Management Bureau in collaboration with
prefectures and municipalities.
National Government
(MLIT) Prefectures
Occurrence of
water-related
disaster
General assets Public infrastructures Public Services
Municipalities Municipalities
Prefectures
Prefectures
Public Services
Offices
Submit -Aggregate the survey data
-Calculate the damage
-Compile and publish Flood
Damage Statistics
-Upload the data to the
DB server of Flood
Damage Statistics
Develop the guideline of flood
damage statistics survey
(coverage and procedure of the
survey, survey format, fill-in
guideline, etc.) Submit within 45 days of disaster
occurrence
Access to Flood Damage
Statistics DB National Government
(Regional Offices, etc.)
Submit
Submit
16
1. Why baseline data collection is important?
2.What would be required to
justify Disaster Management
Investments?
17
Along with the basic survey on flood disaster damages,
it is also required to estimate possible future damages by flood
disasters so as to justify investment in “ex-ante Disaster Risk
Management”.
Cost-Benefit analysis is a useful tool that can provide strong
evidence for the relevance of Flood Disaster Risk Management
investments from the economic aspect.
The benefit is presented as the expected value of the reduction of
possible damages that future projects produces. The estimation of
the expected damages should be as accurate as possible.
Therefore, efforts must be done to improve the accuracy of
damage estimation through covering various kinds of damages,
which include indirect damages as well as direct damages..
2. What would be required to justify Disaster Management Investments? -
18
Categories Methods of evaluation
Manual Manual for Economic Evaluation of Flood Control Investment (April 2005, MLIT)
General conditions
Evaluation period The project implementation period plus 50 years after completion of the project.
Lifetimes of assets levee 50 years, dam 80 years
Evaluated damages
Direct damage property damage, agricultural damage, infrastructure damage
Indirect damage business interruption loss, emergency response cost at household levels
Calculating method of total benefit
Damage reduction, difference between the damages calculated for with and without project cases, is multiplied by the annual exceedance probability, and are summed up to calculate the expected average annual damage, which becomes the annual benefit. Annual benefit is accumulated over the evaluation period and the residual value of the asset constructed by the project is added to determine the total benefit.
Calculating method of total cost Project construction cost (including construction cost, land acquisition cost and compensation cost) and maintenance/operation cost
Social discount rate 4%(based on the real rate of interest of national bond)
Quantitative evaluation criteria Benefit Cost Ratio (B/C)
Methodology of Cost-Benefit Analysis in Japan
Methodology of Cost-Benefit Analysis
19
Items Methods of evaluation
Manual “Manual for Flood Damage Indices Analysis” (2013.6, MLIT)
General conditions
Flood magnitudes
In principle damage reduction is not converted into expected annual damage reduction, but instead the magnitude of damage reduction is assessed under a specific size of flood, such as a design flood (single or multiple floods).
Evaluated damages
Direct damage Human damage (inundated population, expected loss of life, maximum number of persons isolated, etc.)
Indirect damage Damage caused by impaired social functions (medical/welfare facilities, disaster management facilities) Cascading impact (traffic disruption, lifeline, economic damage) Others (underground space, cultural facilities, debris waste generated by flood)
Computation of overall non-monetized impact
For each of the damage categories damages are evaluated quantitatively whenever possible, e.g., affected population, etc
Evaluation of Damages with difficulty in quantitative monetary
estimation in the Cost-Benefit Analysis in Japan
20
2. What would be required to justify Disaster Management Investments? -
10. Increase in land prices as a result of improvement in flood protection
Direct damage
Indirect damage
Intensification benefit
3. Business interruption ・ Business interruption damage (household , businesses, public and public interest services )
・ Emergency response costs (household, businesses, public and public interest service)
4. Impairment of social welfare facilities (hospitals, social welfare facilities, disaster management facilities)
5. Economic impact (disruption of traffic , lifeline, cascading economic impact of damages)
6. Other damage (underground space, cultural facilities, waste generated by flood)
7. Psychological damage
8. Risk premium (insecurities due to possibility of damage)
9. Damages that cause permanent changes to the local economic system (Because the region as a whole is
severely damaged by a large-scale flood the economic system cannot recover to its pre-disaster state.)
( : Damages not considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis (difficult to monetize) but are quantitatively assessed
( : Considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis)
1. Damage to asset ・General property damage (houses, residential properties depreciable assets and inventory assets of
businesses, depreciable assets of fishing and farming properties, etc.)
・ Agricultural product damage
・ Infrastructure damage
2. Human damage (human loss, people isolated etc.)
( : Damages not considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis (difficult to monetize) but are quantitatively assessed
( : Considered in Cost-Benefit Analysis)
21
Consideration of damages with difficulty in quantitative monetary
estimation in the Cost-Benefit Analysis in Japan
2. What would be required to justify Disaster Management Investments? -
22
3. Way forward
23
24
3. Way Forward
1. Collection and accumulation of basic disaster damage data is crucial to promote investment in Disaster Risk Management, through the evidence-based approach.
2. OECD’s effort to establish the common framework of evidence data collection would assist nations’ challenges, which are difficult but indispensable.
3. Cost-benefit analysis of investment in Disaster Risk Management provides strong evidence to justify their relevance. Efforts must be done to improve the accuracy of damage estimation through covering various kinds of damages.
4. Analyses of various damage estimation methods of countries and sharing them are meaningful to present a better framework of damage estimation that includes damage categories, such as “indirect damage”, which contribute to the improvement of accuracy.
Thank you for your attention!
25
25