Comprehensive Flood Risk Management Strategy
Methodology and technology to make resilient urban development
Dr. Hitoshi BABA
Ph.D. Environment and Resource Engineering
Senior Advisor, Japan International Cooperation Agency
email: [email protected]
Urban agglomerations with more than
750,000 inhabitants, 2010.
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population
Division; World Urbanization Prospects: The 2009 Revision; File 12: Population of
Urban Agglomerations with 750,000 Inhabitants or More in 20 Urban agglomerations
with more than 750,000 inhabitants, 2010.
Number of reported flood events.
Source: based on EM-DAT/CRED
Urban agglomerations by size class and
potential risk of flooding, 2025
Source: World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision
Eigenbrod, F., Bell, V.A., Davies, H.N., Heinemeyer, A., Armsworth, P.R., and Gaston, K.J. 2011. The impact of projected increases in urbanization on ecosystem services. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, online advance publication.
Increasing urban flood risk
• Recently increasing urban risk
2004
• China
• India
• Philippine
2005
• Pakistan
• China
• USA
(Hurricane
Katrina)
2006
• Philippine
• China
• Ethiopia
• Indonesia
2007
• India
• China
• UK
• Bangladesh
(cyclone Sidr)
• Indonesia
2008
• Laos
• Myanmar
(cyclone
Nargis)
2009
• Pakistan
• Taipei, Taiwan
• Philippine
• Ulaanbaatar,
Mongolia
2010
• Latin America
• Brazil
• Colombia
Fuente: El Heraldo
2011
• USA
(Flood, Drought, Tornado)
• Thai
Reaffirming HFA,
we know the direction to go. But How?
Priority Action 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national
and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for
implementation.
Priority Action 2: Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and
enhance early warning.
Priority Action 3: Use knowledge, innovation and education to
build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels.
Priority Action 4: Reduce the underlying risk factors.
Priority Action 5: Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective
response at all levels.
High-Level Dialogue Communiqué
Ahead of the Wave: Leading the Way to Resilience
GPDRR, Geneva, May 2013 1. Advocate for disaster risk reduction and the building of resilience to be a central part of the future we want in sustainable development; the post-2015 development agenda; and the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change. All of which are to be supported by a post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction.
2. Call on countries to develop nationally agreed standards for hazard risk assessments especially of critical infrastructure (including schools, health centers, electricity and water supply systems, nodal ITC data centers, and road and transport systems).
3. Start a global safe schools and safe health structures campaign in disaster-prone areas with voluntary funding and commitments to be announced at the World Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction for 2015.
4. Call on the private sector to integrate disaster risk considerations in risk management practices.
5. Stimulate collaboration among the public and private sectors at local and national levels in risk management.
Chair’s Summery
4th session of the GPDRR, Geneva, May 2013
Highlighted action points:
• Assessing Risk; global economic losses, small local events
• Targeting the root causes of risk: price fluctuations, unemployment,
violence, conflict, health burden
• Including Communities for results: women, youth, disabilities
• Leading at the local level: municipalities, schools and hospitals
• Recognizing private sector as actor and partner: economic growth,
resilient business and investment
• Strengthening risk governance: communities and local governments
• Strengthening scientific and technical support: analysis, knowledge,
data, tools, method
• Building mutually reinforcing agendas: sustainable development,
environment, climate change impact, economic and social development
Objectives we encompass for tackling
with increasing urban flood risk
• Ensure the priority of risk reduction among decision makers particularly those standing on development side,
– Realistic understanding of flood risk and impact,
– Risk minded spatial planning,
• Clearly identify and quantitatively assess the uncertain risk and impact in order to get the decision makers acknowledged,
– Vulnerability assessment, risk and impact analysis,
– Damage cost estimation, DRR investment cost versus benefit,
• Effectively reflect the lessons from recent disasters and from precedents into the policy, strategy and planning of development,
– Good practices, models of advanced nations,
– Standard methodology and technology,
• Practice the risk reduction under coordinated manner with stakeholders
– Institutional strengthening, legal framework,
– Community participation, conflict management,
Lessons from experience
• Japan’s most rapid development after the WW2
Tokyo Hiroshima
1945 2004
Good practice of urban flood risk management
• Recently increasing urban risk
• Importance of risk reduction to secure the future sustainable development
1976 Flood in Yokohama
(Tokyo Metropolitan Area)
Multipurpose Rainwater Storage Facility
normally
Kirigaoka reservoirs
(Tsurumi river)
flooded
Controlled flooding
Underground Flood Water Storage
high void ratio : 90%+
Retention and infiltration Measures
Without flood retention measure
Increasing flood
Run-off
Increased run-off
Before development Flo
od
run
-off
Time
Flo
od
run
-off
Time
Function of Countermeasures
Restraining of
increased run-off
to the previous level
After countermeasures
Retention or
infiltration of
Storm water
Dam, Tunnel and High Standard Structures
Underground Flood Tunnel Flood Control Dam
High Standard Embankment
Structural
conventional measures
For flood damage prevention
Non-structural
Co
mp
reh
ensi
ve F
loo
d C
on
tro
l in
U
rban
Riv
er B
asin
In-stream Measures
Information Measures
Channel Normalization
Flood way, Diversion, Polder
Dam, Reservoir
Flood Forecasting, Alert
Public Response
Watershed Measures Storm Water Retention
Surface Water Infiltration
Land Use Regulation
Flood Proofed Building
National level coordination needed
• Needs to get participated by government and private entity of watershed
• Needs to apply technical standard • Needs to make flood control measures obligated
A new scheme is required to effectively implement flood control
measures against increasing inundation disaster in urban river basins.
→Measures through cooperative efforts of river administrator,
sewerage system administrator, local municipalities etc.
○ Frequent flood damages in urban areas due
to the Tokai flood of 2000 and recent disasters
○ Frequent local heavy rains and increase of
inundation hazard due to urban development
Inundation during the Tokai
heavy rains of 2000
“Flood Damage Control Law for Urban River Basins in Japan”
Previous Laws and frameworks of urban flood issues
New framework of Urban Flood Control (UFC)
Flood Damage Control Law for
Specified Urban River Basins (Law No.77, 2003)
-Spatial distribution of measures that cross over the
conventional Laws
-Obligatory installation of flood control facilities
-Obligatory reporting of actions and operations
-Administrative agreement among local public
organizations
-Cost sharing rules
Article 3 Designation of the specified urban river and river area
Article 4 Formation of the plan for flood damage control measures in the
river-basin
Article 6 Development / maintenance of facilities for retention and
infiltration of storm water by ‘river administrator’
Article 7 Defrayment (cost sharing) by other local authorities
Article 8 Special technical standard on drainage facilities
(Restrictions, etc. in the catchments area)
Article 9-22 A Permit, etc. for an action to hamper infiltration of storm water
Article 23-26 Conservation of Regulation pond
Article 27-31 Management agreement
Major features of the UFC Law
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Disaster Management
Cycle
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
DM Capacity
Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.
Early warning, Evacuation training,
Stockpiling, etc.
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.
Early warning, Evacuation training,
Stockpiling, etc.
Regional cooperation, Rescue standard
(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.
Early warning, Evacuation training,
Stockpiling, etc.
Regional cooperation, Rescue standard
(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.
Building code, Risk transfer, Financing, etc.
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
DM Capacity
Structural Measures, Infrastructure Development, Redundant Protection, etc.
Hazard and Risk Assessment, Reducing Vulnerability, City Planning, etc.
Early warning, Evacuation training,
Stockpiling, etc.
Regional cooperation, Rescue standard
(SASOP), CBDRM, etc.
Building code, Risk transfer, Financing, etc.
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
DM Capacity
Disaster Management Cycle
Preparedness,
Defense
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation
Japan’s disaster management relevant
national laws surrounding DMC Tonankai-Nankai Earthquake Law
Mega Scale Earthquake Law
Meteorological Service Law
Volcanic Disaster Prevention Law
Special Law for Severe Damage
Infrastructure Rehabilitation Law
Building Codes
Urban Planning Law
Sewerage Law
Urban Flood Law
Forest Conservation Law
Forest Law
Sediment Disaster Law
Sabo Law
Coast Law
River Law
Flood Defense Law
Disaster Rescue Law
Law for Disaster Management
People Protection Law
Fire Fighting Law
Fire Fighting Organization Law
Oil Incident Law
Nuclear Incident Law
Law of Self Defense Force
Disaster Condolence Fund Law
Victims Rehabilitation Support Law
Disaster Management
Cycle
12 principles of Urban Flood Management
1. Every flood risk scenario is different: there is no flood management blueprint.
2. Designs for flood management must be able to cope with a changing and uncertain
future.
3. Rapid urbanization requires the integration of flood risk management into regular
urban planning and governance.
4. An integrated strategy requires the use of both structural and non-structural measures
and good metrics for “getting the balance right”.
5. Heavily engineered structural measures can transfer risk upstream and downstream.
6. It is impossible to entirely eliminate the risk from flooding.
7. Many flood management measures have multiple co-benefits over and above their
flood management role.
8. It is important to consider the wider social and ecological consequences of flood
management spending.
9. Clarity of responsibility for constructing and running flood risk programs is critical.
10. Implementing flood risk management measures requires multi-stakeholder
cooperation.
11. Continuous communication to raise awareness and reinforce preparedness is necessary.
12. Plan to recover quickly after flooding and use the recovery to build capacity.
Steps for DRR
1. Understanding the risk and share among all stakeholders
– Assess the probable urban risks in accordance with the development plan
– Establish standard methodology and technology of risk assessment
2. Understanding the impact
– Clarify the future impact and damage cost
3. Drafting probable options of structural and non-structural measures
– Prevention cost for each option
4. Formulating the Concept and Strategy to make resilient city development
– Probabilistic approach of DRR planning
– Setting target protection levels
– Optimum combination of structural and non-structural measures
5. Implementing and managing
6. Monitoring and evaluating
Sta
ndar
d D
RR
pro
cess
1. Understanding Flood Hazard
1. Type and cause
2. Probability
3. Flood hazard assessment
2. Understanding Flood Impact
1. Direct impact
2. Indirect impact
3. Vulnerability and Risk assessment
3. Considering structural options
1. Conveyance
2. Flood storage
3. Drainage systems
4. Infiltration
5. Wetland and environmental buffers
6. Flood proofing, resilience/resistance
7. Flood defense
4. Considering non-structural options
1. Flood zoning, land use planning
2. Flood awareness campaigns
3. Health awareness
4. Solid and liquid waste management
5. Community based resilience
improvement
6. Flood insurance
7. Early warning
8. Evacuation
9. Emergency response
10. Flood recovery and reconstruction
5. Evaluating alternative risk reduction
options
1. Evaluating cost and benefit
2. Defining “target protection level”
Acceptance of risk ALARP principle
Opportunity cost
The value of a life
Demands of insurability
Benchmarking and regional cross-
cooperation
Decisions under uncertainty
No regret solutions
Flexible solutions
Decision Trees
3. Designing of measures
6. Implementing and managing
1. Implementation
2. Sustainable maintenance
3. Community engagement
7. Evaluating and benchmarking risk
measures
1. Evaluation
2. Benchmarking and monitoring
2008 2030
50% 64%
Urbanization rate
Future Projection of Land Use in Cilliwung
River Basin, Jakarta
+49%
+57%
Flood risk assessment, increasing discharge
Probabilistic Risk Assessment
1% probability flood hazard. Ciliwung River, Jakarta. Simulation by Dr. BABA
Modeling Software:iRIC +Nais2DFlood
Purposes of Flood Risk Assessment
Purpose Description
Policy Making Formulation of national and regional development policy on strategic
areas for disaster prevention, identification of model areas and
budgetary arrangements; development and/or update of comprehensive
plans, future land use maps, and zoning regulations
Flood Management
Planning Preparedness for emergency actions (evacuation and rescue) and relief
actions; develop hazard mitigation projects; planning for continuity of
operations plans, continuity of government plans, and emergency
operations plans
Preparedness and
Emergency
Actions
Information for disaster mitigation and prevention planning, and river
basin flood control master plan; re-evaluate and prioritize mitigation
actions in local hazard mitigation plans; to communicate with property
owners, business owners, and other citizens about flood risks
Damage Analysis Damage analysis for investment on regional industrial clusters and
insurance on factories, buildings and utilities; risk assessment on
economic corridors such as roads, ports, and railways
Emergency Response, Recovery
Rehabilitation,
Reconstruction
Prevention
Mitigation Preparedness,
Defense
Disaster Management
Cycle
Application of Flood Risk Assessment
Flood Risk Assessment
Institutional Arrangement for
Flood Risk Transfer
Area Business
Continuity Planning
Policy Making
Flood Management
Planning
Assessment of Flood Hazard
• Basic Conditions of Flood Hazard Identification
– Output of the flood hazard identification should be displayed on any Geographic
Information System (GIS) or on printed maps.
– The flood hazard information, identifying inundation risk areas, should be
designated by the relevant, national, state or provincial government in accordance
with the disaster management law and then notified to the municipal governments
concerned.
– If an inundation risk area lies across multiple municipalities, the municipal
governments concerned may need to jointly conduct flood hazard identification
and mapping with relating municipalities in a wide area.
– Evacuation sites and routes for instance, in addition to the information of
inundation risk areas and intensities, can be indicated on the hazard maps in a case
that the flood hazard maps are used at the time of evacuation.
Assessment of Vulnerability and Risk
Type of vulnerability and the Factors Affecting Their Rate of Exposure
Types of Vulnerability Exposure Factors
Individual or household
vulnerability Education, age, gender, race, income, past disaster experience
Social vulnerability Poverty, race, isolation, lack of social security services
Institutional
Vulnerability Ineffective policies, unorganized and non-committed public and private
institutions
Economic Vulnerability Financial insecurity, GDP, sources of national income and funds for
disaster prevention and mitigation
Physical Vulnerability Location of settlement, material of building, maintenance, forecasting
and warning system
Environmental
Vulnerability Poor environmental practices, unprecedented population growth and
migration
System Vulnerability Utility service for the community, health services, resilient system
Place Vulnerability Mitigation and social fabric
Factors Required to Estimate Flood Risk
Factor Definition Key Indicator
A. Hazards Potentially damaging event of flooding Water depth (mainly), water
velocity, inundation period
B. Vulnerability Conditions determined by physical, social
factors to the impact of flood hazard Susceptibility or Resilience; 0 (no)
to 1 (highest) or B = E ÷ D
C. Probability of hazard Extent to which an event is likely occur Return period, probability of
occurrence; 0 (no occurrence) to 1
(100% occurrence)
D. Value of the elements at
risk (or exposure) Aggregate value of assets, operational
indirect products, intangible assets of the
elements at risk
Monetary value ($), death toll, etc
E. Damage of the elements
at risk by an event of
hazard
Aggregate value of direct and indirect
damages to the elements impacted by an
event of flooding
Damage ($, death toll, etc) = B x D
or Value of damage measured by
surveys
F. Risk Combination of the probability of an
event (%) and its consequences
($, death toll)
Risk = C x E or C x B x D
Stage-Damage Curve
Stage or Water Depth
Probability (%)
Return Period (Year)
100
50
10
5
2 1
1
2
10
20
50 100
Secured Stage with No-Damage
Total d
evastation
(maxim
um
dam
age)
Damage ($ or casualty)
– From actual damage survey
– From hypothetical scenario
Probabilistic approach
Hazard
L
evel
A Target
Protection
Level based
on a planned
and designed
hazard
Protection
by mainly
Structural
Measures
Mitigation
by mainly
Non-
structural
Measures
Hazard
L
evel
Minimizing
Damages and
losses at
multiple
scenarios by
Comprehensive
Combination of
Structural and
Non-structural
Measures, with
Redundancy
Multiple
Scenarios
based on
probabilistic
hazard
projection
Deterministic Approach Probabilistic Approach
Magnitude
of Hazard
Damage potential and
impact assessment
Extreme (rare prob.)
Severe damage, need
comprehensive works
Large (low prob.)
Heavy damage, must be
controlled
Medium (mid prob.)
Damage on livelihood, no
casualty
Small (high prob.)
Little damage, avoidable
Impact assess based on wide range of hazard projections
adaptive planning with multiple scenario selections
Coping Strategy to make
Adaptive Planning
Main
selection
More emphasis on
response side
Warning Evacuation
Combination of designed
prevention and response
Mitigation Early Warn
Preventive strategy with
some response measures
Prevention Mitigation
Preventive strategy
mainly by infrastructure
Structural prevention
Damage potential and impact assessment
Magnitude
of flood
Damage potential and
impact
Probability
per year
Extreme Severe damage, need
comprehensive works × 0.1%
Large Heavy damage, must be
controlled × 1%
Medium Damage on livelihood, no
casualty × 10%
Small Little damage, avoidable × 100%
Impact assess based on wide range of hazard projections
Impact value
Average Impact per year
Damage potential and impact assessment
Schematic image of comprehensive
flood management
A) Prevention of hazard by structure
B) Mitigation by watershed measures
C) EW, emergency response and fighting against hazards
D) Hazard proofing and business continuity
E) Temporal acceptance of damage and restoration
F) Evacuation and relocation
Options preventive strategy
reactive strategy
Strategic combination of
Structural and Non-structural Measures
inter- mediate
Flood risk management options
Source: Baca Architects
A) Robust development, raising infrastructure resilience
B) Conserve current land use as it is
C) Use as less development condition (farmland, forest, etc)
D) Gradual restoration for natural condition
E) Protect land from human intervention
Options
Strategic Land Use Management
preventive strategy
reactive strategy
inter- mediate
Total Cost
Protection Cost
Probable Damage
Poin
t C
ost
Optim
um
Utensil for Strategic Target setting
ranging through Reactive to Preventive
Reactive Preventive
Co
st a
nd
Dam
age
Relative costs and benefits of flood
management options.
Modified from source: Adapted from Ranger and Garbett-Shields 2011
Insurance
Resettlement to lower risk
zones
Rebuilding natural
ecosystems
Erosion control
Urban development
control Urban drainage systems
Early warning systems Building
codes
Flood defenses
Reduced social
vulnerability
Flood control
Flood channel
Low benefits relative to costs
High benefits relative to costs
High robustness to uncertainties
Low robustness to uncertainties
In deciding on an acceptable level of risk for populations to bear, the concept
of As Low As Reasonably Practical (ALARP) can be adopted.
- Risk cannot be justified save in extraordinary circumstances
- Tolerable only if risk reduction is impracticable or if benefits only marginally greater than costs
- Tolerable if benefits not significantly greater than costs
- Necessary to maintain assurance that risk remains at this level
Defining “target protection levels” Source: Integrated Urban Flood Risk Management for the 21st Century: A Practitioner’s Handbook,
THE WORLD BANK, GFDRR. 2011, Chapter 5.3.1.
Unacceptable region
ALARP or tolerability region
Broadly acceptable
region
Acceptable levels of risk and the ALARP principle, Source: adapted from Flood site language of risk.
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
Number of casualties
Decreasing human loss by floods in Japan
Outcome of the comprehensive flood risk
management under the rapid urbanization
Increasing Economic damage by flood
Source: EMDAT
Economic Damage by Climatological
Disasters, global total
SOURCE: www.livetradingnews.com
SOURCE: BANKOKPOST
SOURCE: http://investinvietnam.vn
SOURCE: Pratista, Panoramio
Increasing vulnerability
Recent mega scale disasters,
affecting the global economy
• Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, 2011
• Thai Flood, 2011
• …
The idea of Area BCP
• Sharing the critical resources under
– “Regional cooperation” and
– “Inter-regional cooperation”
• Redundant operation of each enterprise or industry by
– “Industrial Cooperation” and
– “Supply Chain cooperation”
Industry agglomerated area
Sharing critical resources
Each enterprise
Industry agglomerated area
Sharing critical resources
Each enterprise
Inter-regional cooperation
Enterprise in a specific
Industry
Industrial cooperation
Supply Chain cooperation
Concept of Area BCP
• Area Command
• Area BCP
Area Commander
Incident #1
Incident Commander
Incident #2
Incident Commander
Incident #3
Incident Commander
Area BCP
BCP #1 BCP #2 BCP #3
External Resources and Infrastructure
Local Disaster Management
Why Area BCP?
• Continuity of operations in industry agglomerated area:
– In certain area where industrial agglomeration takes place, each enterprise
will try to continue operation or to promptly restart.
– To support the industry, critical resources for operations of the area shall be
designated by the entity who is responsible for ensuring the area economy,
through review of business continuity of the companies and disaster
prevention measures of the area.
– The entity must also support the effectiveness of the performance of
operations by securing the resilience of critical resources.
• Two aspects of Area BCP:
– Critical resource(s) management for business continuity of companies of the
area
– Regional disaster prevention (Risk Reduction) by redundant resource
management (backup system)
OMY Economic Center
• In OMY Area in the vicinity of Tokyo Station (major economic center of
Japan, with working population of 290,000 and is home to approx. 4,000
enterprises), the whole area is working together to discuss the
(1) Measures for Stranded Commuters, and
(2) Continuity of Business of Companies in the Area
• Securing staff safety, staging area, electricity, water and sanitation, etc.
Source:Disaster Prevention Efforts of OMY Area(Mitsubishi Estate Co., Ltd.)
Tokyo Station
Marunouchi
Otemachi
Yurakucho
Kasumigaseki Imperial Palace
ASEAN Area BCP Study
Under cooperation between JICA and the AHA Centre, the ASEAN Area BCP Study is in progress
– To collect and analyze information and data necessary for natural disaster risk assessment and formulation of the Area BCP and
– To formulate the Area BCPs for three pilot areas, in Indonesia (Bekashi to Karawang), the Philippines (Cavite, Laguna, Metro Manila) and Vietnam (Haiphong)
Conducting activities and getting output such as
– Mapping of industrial agglomerated areas (Industrial Area) in 10 AESAN countries
– Assessment of vulnerability of infrastructure of distribution system and study of supply chain
– Assessment of overall risks of the countries
– Assessment of risks of the pilot areas
– Formulation of the Area BCP for the pilot areas
– Preparation of guidelines of Area BCP
Conclusion
• Flood risk is increasing in accordance to recent rapid urban agglomerations
• Need common understanding of the risk and impact among all stakeholders
• We should learn from our experiences of enhancing capacity of flood risk management in the process of urbanization
• Established methodology and technology can be applied to newly emerging urban development
• Probabilistic risk assessment is essentially important to make common understanding of the risks
• Probable impacts and damages should be analyzed based on the multiple risk scenarios to create a strategic target level of safety and comprehensive combination of Structural and Non-structural Measures
• Considering the increasing vulnerability of industrial agglomerations and globally expanding economic damages in case particularly of large scale disaster, the Area BCP is one of the challenging DRR travels