Resilient Cities: Plan Evaluation for Flood

Transcription

1 10th International institute for infrastructure resilience and reconstruction By Hwayoung Kim & Ryuji Kakimoto Resilient Cities: Plan Evaluation for Flood Hwayoung KIM Graduate Student Graduate School of Science and Technology Kumamoto University

2 1 By Hwayoung Kim & Ryuji Kakimoto Introduction Highly advanced techs for natural hazard prevention However, carefully applied to evaluation techniques based on culture, economy, and politics in eastern countries. Looking backward how the system is working well in the developing country when compared to the developed countries at the hazard mitigation policies

3 2 Motivation July 28th 2011 in Seoul, 302mm during a day. Total accumulated rainfall for 3 days 595mm (41% of average annual precipitation) 16 dead; 100B (KRW) July 12 th 2012 in Kyushu, 315mm during half a day. Total accumulated rainfall 780mm (Avg. 1980mm) 23 dead, 2 missing; Damage cost 62.1B (JPY)

4 3

5 Selection for research cities Kumamoto City Geographical feature Major Threat Annual Prep. (mm) Annual Temp. ( C) Major Threat LHMP Feature Population Kumamoto Flood O Port City 733,885 (as of 2013) Baltimore Flood O Port City 621,342 (2012) Pohang Flood O Port City 523,489 (2013) 4 Table.1 Characteristics of selected cities

6 5 Berke & Conroy (2000) Brody (2003b) Tang, et al (2008) Housing Factual basis Factual basis Transportation Goals Goals & objectives Environment Actions Tools, approaches & methodologies Energy Land use & design Coordination & communication Implementation, monitoring, mitigation, & alternatives Economic development Public facilities Table.2 The plan components used for each research

7 6 Three categories applied are in this research as following; 1. FACT, 2. GOAL/OBJECTIVE, 3. AND ACTION.

8 7 FACT GOAL ACTION 1-A. Population growth within floodplain 1-B. Children, the elderly, & the disabled 1-C. Single head of household 1-D. No. of local critical facilities 2-A. Efforts discourage development activity within local hazardous areas 2-B. Efforts to protect property 2-C. Efforts to preserve natural resource 2-D. Efforts to minimize local fiscal loss 1-E. No. of Private structure 2-E. Efforts to promote sustainable communities 1-F. Median household income 1-G. Households below poverty line 1-H. Emergency plan and shelters 2-F. Efforts to maintain public facilities 2-G. Efforts to promote local awareness 2-H. Efforts to improve communication & coordination 3-A. Proper check-up system 3-B. Precise time schedule for implementation 3-C. Citizen participation level.

9 8 The author involved in all groups to get rid of interpretation gaps Research Method 6 people (2 Professors, 1 researcher, and 3 graduate students as a team) 3 sub-teams as a pair for Japanese, English, and Korean The same indicators and methods, comparing results three times

10 9 Overall plan quality measurement 1. In this research, there are 3 major categories fact, goals/objectives, implementation/monitoring/action/, and integrating local effort into plan. 2. There is the equation developed PC j = so that I j we could apply this equation. m j 10 2 m j i = 1 PC j = 10 2m j m j i= 1 I j and TPQ = 3 i= 1 PC j Where PCj=quality of the jth plan category (ranging 0-10); mj= number of indicators within the jth plan category; represents the ith indicator s score (ranging 0-2); and TPQ=total scores of a whole plan (ranging 0-40).

11 Overall plan quality measurement (Cont.) PC j = 10 2m j m j i= 1 I j TPQ = 3 i= 1 PC j Each indicator could possible have point from 0 to 2 based on plan context analysis. EX), if highly prepare for that indicator very well, that indicator got point 2, but it mentions but not detail for that indicator, it would get point 1, if that indicator never mention in the plan, it will get score 0 for that indicator. 2. Naturally, if there would be 8 indicators under the certain category, its total sum of score will be 16. To remove the fractional score, the sum of score will multiply to 10. Then, the score will be divided by Likewise, after each category calculated, all categories sum of score will be added as Total Plan Quality.

12 11 Result of Research FACT GOAL ACTION TPQ BALTIMORE 9.38 / / / / KUMAMOTO 5.63 / / / / POHANG 3.12 / / / / Table.3 The total plan quality for each city

13 12 Result of Research FACT GOAL ACTION TPQ BALTIMORE 9.38 / / / / KUMAMOTO 5.63 / / / / POHANG 3.12 / / / / Full of GIS maps The detailed fact based-information onto the plan Table.4 City of Baltimore, USA Not found number of private facilities within floodplain (however, there was the estimated value of private and critical facilities within 100 and 500-year floodplain

14 13 Result of Research FACT GOAL ACTION TPQ BALTIMORE 9.38 / / / / KUMAMOTO 5.63 / / / / POHANG 3.12 / / / / Table.5 Kumamoto City, Japan Lack of the related maps The relevant fact based-information onto the plan such as potential dangerous area address and phone number Not found Socio-economic status data However, the City distributes A4 size, Hazard protection manual. It includes all kinds situation of hazard.

15 Result of Research FACT GOAL ACTION TPQ BALTIMORE 9.38 / / / / KUMAMOTO 5.63 / / / / POHANG 3.12 / / / / Table.6 Pohang City, Korea Republic of Seriously lack of maps, not user-friendly, over 800-page long plan Too many vague sentences in the plan No population projection/growth pattern for the future Not consistent with information [number of shelter (O), location of shelter (X)] Not mentioned goal, but mostly recovery action. 14 Slightly mentioned finance/investment plan for hazard mitigation

16 15 Recommendation 1. Kumamoto Plan contains a large amount of information and is systematic, but not detail. 2. Kumamoto and Pohang plans need to be a project-oriented plan like Baltimore. 3. More maps, of course, with the detailed information

17 16 Conclusion 1. Kumamoto and Pohang should use more active land use policy (acquisition, taking). 2. Pohang should be able to make community-based hazard map. 3. Pohang (and others) plan needs to be concise, focusing on fact findings around their community. 4. Local community-oriented hazard mitigation plan making in Pohang should be taken into account.

18 17 Thank you for your attention. Any questions and comments?