Japan’s response to its deadliest storm in 25 years provides an excellent opportunity for the world community to draw lessons in disaster preparedness, says a new report.
The report on the Tokage typhoon that swept across much of southern Japan on October 20 last year shows that while the human impacts were heavy, extensive damage was avoided due to the good practices put in place at all levels of Japanese society.
It says, the package of measures related to governance, education and awareness, information and data management and related procedures collectively helped in mitigating the negative impacts of the disaster.
Japan has been at the forefront of sound practices in minimizing the destructive impacts of disasters. This UNEP study on the Tokage typhoon will provide valuable lessons for mitigation and management in other countries facing similar disasters.
The report also reinforces the importance of environmental concerns in the entire disaster management cycle of prevention, preparedness, assessment, mitigation and response and to integrate environmental concerns into planning for relief, rehabilitation, reconstruction and development.
On October 20 2004, the Tokage typhoon swept through and ravaged much of the southern half of Japan. People were overcome by the massive waves and flash floods triggered by the typhoon’s heavy rains and strong winds, which left at least 93 people dead. At its height, Tokage, packing winds of up to 144km/h, had an 800km radius, and set off more than 700 landslides.
In Toyo-oka city, the hardest hit place, residences, infrastructure, forests and agricultural lands were severely damaged. A major challenge was dealing with the very high amount of waste debris caused by the typhoon. In the course of one day, Tokage produced 45,000 tons of waste, an amount equal to the total waste the city normally produces over one and a half years.
A number of lessons were learnt form the Tokage typhoon in Toyo-oka with respect to infrastructure management, policy, strategy and planning and community activities. The first and foremost lesson the report says is that disaster management plans should incorporate environmental dimensions and should anticipate the impact of disasters on the environment, as well as the impact of environmental practices (eg. forest and river management) on the impacts of the disaster.
A number of good environmental measures are in place in Japan but these have to be looked at in light of the needs of disaster management. It is imperative that environmental knowledge is integrated into the prediction, prevention, risk reduction, assessment and response policies, concludes the report.
The impacts of disasters, whether natural or man-made, not only have human dimensions but environmental ones as well. Deforestation, forest management practices or agricultural systems can exacerbate the negative environmental impacts of a storm or typhoon, leading to landslides, flooding, silting and water contamination.
Taking care of environment reduces the risks that natural and man-made hazards pose to people living today.
Injurious helmet
By Dr Fatema Jawad
Can helmets prevent head and neck injuries in skiers and snowboarders, is a question to be answered with evidence, states a recent issue of the British Medical Journal.
Twenty years back it was argued that helmet use should be mandatory in skiers up to the age of 17 years, due to the risk of severe head injuries. There is evidence that helmets are effective at preventing head, brain and facial injuries in bicyclists, helmet use would therefore seem to be reasonable.
However, helmets may increase the risk of spinal injury due to the biomechanics of the association between the helmet and head and neck, particularly in children. A helmet may also exert large bending or twisting force on the neck in a routine fall. A study was done on accident cases reported by 20 skiing centres in Quebec, Canada. Overall 693 people had head injuries, with 483 having concussion.
Of the total neck injuries, 58 were assessed as sprains, 21 fractures and nine nerve or muscle sprains. No significant difference was found between the figures of people acquiring head injuries wearing helmets or without helmets. In children below 15 years, those not wearing helmets had more severe head injuries.
Helmet users in the 15 to 25 years age group had a greater proportion of neck injuries. Although it is known that helmets protect bicyclists against head injuries, the study could only add evidence that helmets may reduce the risk of head injuries in skiers and snowboarders by 29 per cent to 56 per cent and evidence was limited regarding helmet use and neck injuries.
