Menu
Published online 2012 Jun 30.
A tsunami can kill or injure people and damage or destroy buildings and infrastructure as waves come in and go out. A tsunami is a series of enormous ocean waves caused by earthquakes, underwater landslides, volcanic eruptions, or asteroids. Tsunamis can: Travel 20-30 miles per hour with waves 10-100 feet high. Cause flooding and disrupt transportation, power, communications, and the water supply.
PMID: 23113189
This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.
Abstract
The huge earthquake in 11 March 2012 which followed by a destructive tsunami in Japan was largest recorded earthquake in the history. Japan is pioneer in disaster management, especially earthquakes. How this developed country faced this disaster, which had significant worldwide effects? The humanitarian behavior of the Japanese people amazingly wondered the word’s media, meanwhile the management of government and authorities showed some deficiencies. The impact of the disaster is followed up after the event and the different impacts are tried to be analyzed in different sectors. The situation one year after Japan 2011 earthquake and Tsunami is overviewed. The reason of Japanese plans failure was the scale of tsunami, having higher waves than what was assumed, especially in the design of the Nuclear Power Plant. Japanese authorities considered economic benefits more than safety and moral factors exacerbate the situation. Major lessons to be learnt are 1) the effectiveness of disaster management should be restudied in all hazardous countries; 2) the importance of the high-Tech early-warning systems in reducing risk; 3) Reconsidering of extreme values expected/possible hazard and risk levels is necessary; 4) Morality and might be taken as an important factor in disaster management; 5) Sustainable development should be taken as the basis for reconstruction after disaster.
Keywords: Japan, Earthquake, Tsunami, Disaster, Crisis Management, Fukushima
Introduction
The magnitude 9.0 Japan’s Tohoku Earthquake occurred at 14:46 local time on Friday, 11 March 2011, 125 km east coast of Honshu and 380 km far from Tokyo and rattled the large parts of Japan and some part of east China and Russia with 30 km depth of the hypocenter (1). This earthquake that lasted approximately 3 minutes (170 seconds) caused a 130 km long by 159 km wide rupture zone on the pacific plate subduction zone and followed by a huge tsunami with more than 40 meter waves. The destructive aftermaths of this incident made an irreparable disaster not only for the Japan, but also for the whole world because except for the enormous death toll and debris, the damages of nuclear power plants were a hazardous unexpected tragedy.
Casualties and damages
According to the report of the Japanese National Police Agency, 15854 dead, 3167 missing and 26992 injured across twenty prefectures are the result of this devastating earthquake and tsunami which ruined more than 125000 buildings. Moreover, it caused long blackouts for more than 4.4 million buildings and left 1.5 million buildings out of water for days (2), also large fires were triggered one after another even for weeks after the main quake. Explosion and demolition of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant (Fukushima Daiichi), which generated radioactive contamination near the plant’s area with irreversible damages to the environment, was one the most significant issues of this catastrophe and ranked 7 (the most sever level for nuclear power plant) based on the International Nuclear Event Scale, similar to the Chernobyl disaster on 26 April 1986 (3). Therefore, it is not strange to consider to this earthquake as the most important destructive seismic event of the beginning of the twenty first century in the advanced industrial world.
Losses intensified by hit of the tsunami as the statistics shows it was more fatal (Fig. 1) and also more buildings destroyed by its strike; However, the quake was the main cause of the partial damage of buildings (4). Figure 2 manifests the building losses distribution through affected areas and Fig. 3 reveals the relative impact of the earthquake vs. tsunami in each prefecture of Japan (4).
Division of total 19100 death and missed people by the reason as of 10th March 2012 (CATDAT)
Building damage distribution (CATDAT)
The relative impact of the earthquake vs. the tsunami in each location
Seismology and Seismic History
This mega thrust earthquake is categorized as a great earthquake with the magnitude more than 8 in scientific seismological classification (5). Over 1000 aftershocks, some of which were larger than the recent catastrophic earthquakes in Iran such as Bam, Iran 2003, hit the area since the main shock. Regardless of the consequent tsunami, the Tohoku Sendai Earthquake (2011) is the largest recorded earthquake in the history of Japan in terms of magnitude while the territory of Japan is known by numerous and critical earthquakes. There are two momentous calamitous earthquakes in history of Japan: The great Kanto earthquake with magnitude of 7.9 on 1 September 1923 which destroyed Tokyo and Yokohama rigorously by the severe quake and subsequent fires and caused more than 143000 deaths (6, 7); and the Kobe earthquake (also known as Hanshin- Awaji earthquake) with magnitude of 6.9 on 17 January 1995 that left more than 6400 demises (6, 8). The Kanto incident is still the deadliest earthquake in Japanese history and the Kobe earthquake was the most costly natural disaster of the world since Tohoku Earthquake 2011 (9).
Methodology
Japan crisis management system
Japan has an overall population of 127 million and is one of the most densely populated countries in the world (340 persons per Km), where the population highly concentrated around Tokyo (6). This earthquake-prone country as a pioneer in crisis management has a comprehensive plan for preparing against disasters, consists of the Central Council for Accident Prevention, chaired by Prime Minister, set of cohesive rules for immediate response to all of the unexpected incidents, the advanced research system and the extensive public education about disasters. As the result of this plan, in the case of an accident, people, government officials and rescue departments know exactly what to do while the alarm is sounded, without chaos.
It was after the disastrous Kobe earthquake of 17 January 1995 (M6.9) that crisis management of Japan greatly promoted since the government set up a GIS system and a general computer network. This system contains different subsystems to operate all disaster related functions from prevention before the disaster to damage evaluation after it (10). Additionally, the most advanced earthquake and tsunami early warning system of the whole world is installed in Japan during 2003 to 2007, which is one of the main parts of this crisis management system. This warning system had a considerable role in Tohoku 2011 earthquake to reduce losses and save lives. Several Japanese media such NHK channel and also mobile phone networks have the most responsibility of broadcasting the news of early warning system.
In management of the 11 March 2011 crisis, one of the most facilitative factors for emergency managers was proper behavior of people who follow the commands cautiously. In other words, the “social capital” in this country had a significant role in recovery after the incident as people’s high respect to roles and moral values and their solidarity prevent them from influx for aid and looting and motivate them to consider the public benefits instead of self-interests.
Response to the disaster
Immediately after the event, The Government of Japan (GOJ) held National Committee for Emergency Management, headed by Prime Minister. The government declared an emergency in effected area and dispatched the Japan Self Defense Forces for rescue operations (11). All ministries and departments such as Foreign Ministry, Ministry of Transport and Ministry of Health were involved in this response, also local offices of disaster response in all prefectures begins their operations as their duty was already clear. The Ministry of Health was in charge of preparing suitable vehicles for supplying water and assigning hospitals for remedy of casualties and people who have been exposed to radiation. Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries with Ministry of Finance were responsible for providing food, portable toilet, blanket, radio, gasoil, torch, dry ice and other essential things. By the command of the government, all of the main highways in north of the country were completely occupied for emergency response activities. Besides, the transport systems includes subway, shipping and the Shinkansen bullet train ceased their activity in Sendai and Tokyo instantly after the quake.
Moreover, at the day of event the Government of Japan declared “the state of nuclear emergency” due to the threat posed by reactors in two Fukushima nuclear power plants (I and II) and 140,000 residents within 20 km of the plant evacuated. At 15:36 JST (Japan Standard Time) on 12 March, there was an explosion in the reactor building at Unit 1 in Fukushima Daiichi (I) power plant. At 11:15 JST on 14 March, the explosion of the building surrounding Reactor 3 occurred. An explosion at 06:14 JST on 15 March in Unit 2, damaged the pressure-suppression system. When the disaster began on 11 March 2011, reactor unit 4 was shut down for periodic inspection and all fuel rods had been transferred to the spent fuel pool on an upper floor of the reactor building. On 15 March, an explosion damaged the fourth floor rooftop area of the unit 4 reactor.
Japanese Red Crescent Society (JRC), which had a substantial role in initial relief operations and temporary housing, deployed its teams promptly. JRC performed properly for accommodation of refugees and evacuees in schools, public buildings, and shelters. This society adapted its operations to all other rescue organizations and NGOs, which deployed to the area later.
![Drawing conclusions pdf Drawing conclusions pdf](/uploads/1/2/5/8/125878048/407160926.gif)
Construction of temporary housing in quakestricken prefectures was begun 8 days after the event and the first set of buildings was expected to be ready within a month (12). In addition to medical aids, therapists and social workers were dispatched to the affected zone by Health ministry and then in coming days the concentration of treatments was shifting to psychotherapy from physical sicknesses. In addition, this Ministry performed required actions in order to control and inhibit infectious diseases and encouraged people to use masks (2).
Fire was reported in eight prefectures after the quake. Fire suppression of gas pipeline took a few days and fires in Cosmo Oil Installations and some other refineries lasted 3 days. Generally, the number of fires increased from 44 to 325 in a week, but its growth rate declined. All the fires, which were triggered after the earthquake, were under control of Japanese Police and it can be said that they could prosperously cease and extinguish them (13). On the other hand, these fires and breakdown of six out of nine oil factories faced the affected areas with fuel shortage. The gas pipeline repairing operation had a slow progress, too. Therefore, about one million liter gasoline per day had been carried to the damaged areas by tankers and then by cargo train in order to compensate lack of fuel. Low displacement capacity of oil and coal shipments caused delays in delivering fuel loads, which were importing from countries such as South Korea and Russia, to consumers (13).
Due to the shutting down of the power plants which were cracked by the quake and tsunami, authorities begun imposing sporadic power cuts nationwide to make up for production losses. Correspondingly, large factories like Toyota and Sony halted their production activities and many citizens in Kanto reduced their power consumption in order to abridge the time of blackouts (14).
Nuclear crisis
There are 54 reactors in Japan, but since the tsunami on March 2011 that destroyed Fukushima plant (Fig. 4) and triggered the world’s worst nuclear crisis in 25 years, the government did not allow to restart any reactor that have undergone maintenance due to public safety (15). The first nuclear power plant of Japan was initiated with collaboration of English corporations in 1973, but these kinds of power plants then developed by American technology. All the 11 reactors in Fukushima 1, Fukushima 2, Onagawa and Tokai nuclear power plants automatically safe shut down after the quake; however, arrival of tsunami debris with high waves damaged reactor’s cooling systems and eventually, resulted hazardous explosions. This could have been prevented if the designers had estimated the probable maximum altitude of the tides more prudently. The explosion occurred in 4 of the 6 reactors of Fukushima 1 power plant one after another, while the unit 3 reactor was more damaged and more intensively contaminated the surrounding area. A few hours before each of these explosions, authorities warned about the cooling system breakdown, ordered to evacuate neighboring people and tried to drop the pressure of vapors, but in all of them the hydrogen explosion finally happened.
Fukushima 1 NPP explosion, 14 March 2011 (DigitalGlobe)
The owner of the Fukushima Plant, The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), is accused of mismanagement and hiding the truth about the real damage caused by the disaster at the expense of saving the company (16). Moreover, according to reports, it was expected that TEPCO safely shutdown reactors of Fukushima 1 nuclear power plant approximately a month before the 11 March earthquake, but apparently the company avoided this action because of economic issues.
Over 140 thousand residents were evacuated from 20 Km around the Fukushima plant. Radiation penetrated in foods and drinking water in 30 kilometer far from the evacuated area, and authorities inhibited distribution of these polluted foodstuffs (13). U.S. Department of Energy announced a wide area beyond 80-kilometer radius around the Fukushima plant is affected by radiation (17).
The explosion of Fukushima power plant and its aftermaths aroused public concerns about nuclear energy in Japan and other earthquake prone countries. Consequently, other power plants, which were not resistant to the probable future quakes with magnitude more than 8, ceased they activity gradually sequentially by the command of The Prime Minister. TEPCO shut its last operating nuclear reactor in 26 March 2012 for regular maintenance, leaving just one running reactor supplying Japan’s creaking power sector (15). Then again, on 10 April 2012 (less than a month later), as the summer arrives, while Japan is going to struggle with electricity shortage, the government planned to restart one of the atomic plants in Kansai after approval its safety (18) and faced with people’s disagreement.
Furthermore, the nuclear crisis has led to growing opposition against atomic power plants in other countries, particularly in Germany, where thousands of citizens participated in an anti-nuclear demonstration. This disapproval also affected the regional election results unbelievably. In the state of Baden-Wurttemburg, which traditionally had gone with Christian Democratic Union party for 58 years, most of people voted for the Green Party who was against with 17 nuclear reactors in this country (19).
Results: Crisis consequences
The 11 March 2011 earthquake had many deleterious environmental impacts that take a long time to recover. Apart from radioactive materials dispersed due to nuclear plant explosions and discharging polluted radioactive water of cooling systems to the sea, the subsequent tsunami induced huge amount of debris contains building materials, broken boats, cars, trees and etc. that cause environmental harmful issues.
Radioactive pollutions and radiations as the most harmful repercussions of the earthquake induced fear and concern among resident. Most evacuees did not return to their home even after the safety of the regions was assured. However, the government tried hard to convince people to return to their homes by checking and promulgation the radiation doses constantly, but just the population of old people gradually increased. Therefore, satisfying young people to come back will be a demanding challenge for the government.
- A year after the event, anecdotal evidence suggests that fear of radiation, rather than contamination itself, is triggering stress-related problems among nuclear evacuees (), despite the experts emphasized that the doses are too low to develop cancer. Even in more distant areas, where completely secure, parents do not allow their children to play outside. Although there have been no recorded deaths from radiation in Fukushima, according to the Yomiuri Shimbun newspaper, psychological trauma associated with evacuation, pneumonia and heart disease were much more fatal based on statistics. Therefore, in months after the event, Japanese Red Cross concentrated on mental health issues.
- Also, the tsunami had adverse effects on agriculture and requires long-term reconstruction at least for 2 or 3 years. In addition, the fishing industry faced to critical continuing problems. Most reports acknowledged that Japan’s food exports could be limited by Japan’s current Production and supply shortages, along with boosting food safety concerns and possible long-term radiation threats to its food production, in contrast possibly its need for food imports will increase in future (21).
- Moreover, since Japan is a country covered by jungles, wooden houses are very prevalent in this country and despite the dropping rate of wood imports in recent decade, due to boom reduction of this kind of homes; the Tohoku earthquake caused a 70% rise in wood import rate by enhancement of the wood demand. This made a competition for wood exporters from different countries such as Australia, America, and China.
- One of the important impacts of the Fukushima power plant explosion is its psychological consequences. Regardless of common diseases such as infectious ones that break out after earthquakes, the radioactive contamination permeated to the residential areas where people was living, working and planting brought a ten times fatal disease, which is hopelessness and untruthfulness. People know they should leave anything they had include home and agriculture plant and this lead them to an ambiguous future which is unstable and they should build everything from beginning. The increase in number of suicides in power plant’s surrounding areas even far from them and farmers concern about safety of their productions and land even 100 kilometers far from the affected zone prove the strength and influence of this issues.
- Japan should also challenge with the problem of enhancing of unemployment. Large number of refugee and evacuees left their home and moved to other cities. Also, workers of car and electronic factories are now jobless by factory closure so they are forced to immigrate (22). Japanese government created around 20 thousands of jobs in the emergency measures to combat the effects of the disaster in a month, but the number of the unemployed ones was much more than created jobs (23). Additionally, women especially in rural areas, who used to were involved in tough works such as agriculture and fishing, after the disaster have to work in other posts and try different occupations in order to help to family economic. Many of these women take apart in protests against Fukushima power plant issues in Tokyo in October and November 2011. It seems that this earthquake has modified the women life style in affected prefectures as now they have more important roles in family issues and it is big change in an almost traditional male-dominated Japan.
- Following the shutting, the Fukushima power plant, on February 2012, the House Foreign Relations Committee off Japan approved to export its nuclear equipment to Vietnam and Jordan. Also Japanese companies signed agreements with India, Bangladesh, and Turkey about construction, operation, and management of nuclear power plants in these countries, despite environment activist’s oppositions in recent months against these transactions and their high costs and permanent detriments for humans and earth. Actually, the nuclear power in spite its approximate low costs, have many hazardous disadvantages that the Japan 2011 accident and the Chernobyl 1986 are good samples for this fact. Unfortunately, developing countries do not consider these consequences and endanger the environment and people’s lives while Japanese authorities are just accenting their own country’s benefits.
Conclusion
In Tohoku earthquake and tsunami of 11 March 2011 despite the unprecedented scale of the quake itself, infrastructures and buildings mostly remained standing and proved the resilience of Japan is planning laws especially in constructions and earthquake technology. Hence, if the earthquake had been the sole problem, then Japan could have claimed for itself a momentous prosperous in planning for the impact of a major earthquake. The reason of Japanese plans failure was the large-scale tsunami, which had higher waves than what was assumed in designing. In addition, the fact that Japanese authorities considered economic benefits more than safety and moral factors exacerbate the situation. Even after the disaster, this country just cared about economic benefits and sought to export its technology to other countries.
However, this disaster was a motivation for people and governments worldwide to replace clean energy with the hazardous one and it was a reminder to decommissioning the old and unsafe operating power plants. Thus, the Metsamor nuclear power plant in Armenia, Iran’s neighboring country, is a critical threat in the region with high seismic risk. Governments had to plan long-term and costly solutions to replace the nuclear energy with clean and renewable forms of it with respect to criteria and moral values, not only the benefits.
Although energy issues and management of power plant’s crisis was a blind spot in Tohoku disaster management, Japanese social ethics and their manner in dealing with the problem were the most advantageous points. Discipline, maintaining calm, public confidence in managers and scientific management based on the plans helped to improve the situation more quickly (Figure-5). Long queues of Japanese People for food and facilities instead of chaos, which we mainly consider in developing countries, could be a good proof for other countries that enterprising on educating people about how to act in crisis is very operative and effective in enhancement of disaster management.
These two photos taken over a six-month period showing aftermath of the March 11, 2011, tsunami and its cleanup progress in Wakabayashi-ward in Sendai, Miyagi Prefecture, in northeastern Japan. (pacificcitizen.org)
The 11 march 2011 earthquake was an alarm for seismologist all over the world, particularly in Tehran as a capital city, to revise their methods and evaluation of estimating the plausible time and magnitude of earthquake. It could be an alarm for us to be more meticulous and cautious about the earthquake hazard as prepared and industrialized Japan with the most modernized technology confronted many extensive troubles, which were out of their predictions. Now we should ask this question “how much we are prepared in an earthquake prone country with a capital located exactly on active faults?”
Ethical considerations
![Conclusion Conclusion](/uploads/1/2/5/8/125878048/678498937.png)
Ethical issues (Including plagiarism, Informed Consent, misconduct, data fabrication and/or falsification, double publication and/or submission, redundancy, etc) have been completely observed by the authors.
Acknowledgments
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests. The authors appreciate the assistance of IIEES and Tehran university colleagues for finalizing this study, specially H.R. Jalilian, M.H Pishahang and Z. Hejazi.
References
1. USGS Magnitude 9.0: Near the east coast of Honshu, Japan. 2011. Available from: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/2011/usc0001xgp/.
2. WHO . World Health Organization; 2011. Japan earthquake and tsunami situation reports no 1 to 18. Available from: http://www.wpro.who.int. [Google Scholar]
3. IAEA Fukushima nuclear accident update log. 2011. Available from: http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html.
4. Vervaeck A, Daniell J. Japan: 366 days after the Quake: 19000 lives lost, 1.2 million buildings damaged, $574 billion. Earthquake Report. 2012. Available from: http://earthquake-report.com/2012/03/10/japan-366-days-after-the-quake-19000-lives-lost-1-2-million-buildings-damaged-574-billion/.
5. Israel B. The science behind Japan’s deadly earthquake. Live Science. 2011. Available from: http://www.livescience.com/13177-japan-deadly-earthquake-tsunami.html.
6. OECD The Organization for Rconomic Co-operation and Development Studies in Risk Management, Japan Earthquakes. 2006. Available from: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/55/60/37377837.pdf.
7. USGS Historic earthquakes: Kanto (Kwanto), Japan. 2010. Available from: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/events/1923_09_01.php.
8. Jorgenson P. Kobe earthquake was deadliest, but not largest in ’95. USGS news room. 1996. Available from: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=744.
9. Zhang B. Top 5 most expensive natural disasters in history. 2011. Available from: http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/top-5-most-expensive-natural-d/47459.
10. Yalçıner Ö. Urban Information Systems for Earthquake - Resistant Cities: A Case Study on Pendik, İstanbul. Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi; Ankara, Turkey: 2000. pp. 50–100. [Google Scholar]
11. OCHA Japan: earthquake and tsunami situation report no 1. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 2011. Available from: http://ochaonline.un.org.
12. OCHA Japan earthquake and tsunami report no 10. 2011. Available from: http://ochaonline.un.org.
13. Shaw R, Parashar S, Noralene U, Nguyen H, Fernandez G, Mulyasari F, et al. Mega disaster in a resilient society: The great east Japan (Tohoku Kanto) earthquake and tsunami of 11th March 2011. Kyoto University; Japan: 2011. [Google Scholar]
14. Joe M. Kanto area works on energy conservation. Japan Times. 2011. Available from: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news.html.
15. Anonymous Japan’s Tepco shuts its last reactor, power risks loom. Reuters. 2012. Available from: http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFBRE82P04420120326?pageNumber=1.
16. Heyes JD. Japan radiation specialists accuses Tepco of total cover-up regarding radiation exposure of nuclear plant workers. Natural News. 2011. Available from: http://www.naturalnews.com/033028_TEPCO_radiation_exposure.html#ixzz1STeVakuP.
17. Anonymous U.S. Department of Energy releases radiation monitoring data from Fukushima area. 2011. Available from: http://energy.gov/articles/us-department-energy-releases-radiation-monitoring-data-fukushima-area.
18. Inajima T, Horie M. Japan closer to restarting first reactors since Fukushima. 2012. Available; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-09/japan-closer-to-restarting-first-reactors-since-fukushima.html.
19. Anonymous Japan’s nuclear crisis affects german energy policy, elections. Environmental and Energy Study Institute. 2011. Available: http://www.eesi.org/japan%E2%80%99s-nuclear-crisis-affects-german-energy-policy-elections-04-apr-2011.
20. McCurry J. Japan’s Tohoku earthquake: 1 year on. The Lancet. 2012. pp. 880–881. no 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60378-X. [PubMed]
21. Johnson R. Japan’s 2011 earthquake and tsunami: Food and agriculture implications. CRS Report for Congress 2011.
22. Anonymous Unemployment rises in Japan after earthquake. WalesOnline. 2011. Available from: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/latest-world-news/2011/05/31/unemployment-rises-in-japan-after-earthquake-91466-28792919/.
23. Anonymous high unemployment rate in the areas affected by tsunami. JapanNews. 2011. Available from: http://japannews.best100japan.com/eathquake-in-japan-news-and-comments/japan-high-unemployment-rate-in-the-areas-affected-by-tsunami.html.
Articles from Iranian Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of Tehran University of Medical Sciences
Published online 2011 May 18. doi: 10.1155/2011/920813
PMID: 22046551
Abstract
Tsunami of 2004, caused by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, is the most devastating tsunami in modern times, affecting 18 countries in Southeast Asia and Southern Africa, killing more than 250,000 people in a single day, and leaving more than 1.7 million homeless. However, less reported, albeit real, is its impact in the islands of the Indian Ocean more than 1,000 miles away from its epicenter. This is the first peer-reviewed paper on the 2004 tsunami events specifically in the eleven nations bordering the Indian Ocean, as they constitute a region at risk, due to the presence of tectonic interactive plate, absence of a tsunami warning system in the Indian Ocean, and lack established communication network providing timely information to that region. Our paper has a dual objective: the first objective is to report the 2004 tsunami event in relation to the 11 nations bordering the Indian Ocean. The second one is to elaborate on lessons learned from it from national, regional, and international disaster management programs to prevent such devastating consequences of tsunami from occurring again in the future.
1. Introduction
Tsunami is a series of ocean waves typically caused by large undersea earthquakes or volcano eruptions at tectonic plate boundaries. These surges of water may reach 100 feet and cause widespread destruction when they crash ashore. They race across the sea at a speed up to 500 miles per hour and cross the entire Pacific Ocean in less than one day. Their long wavelength means that they lose very little energy along the way.
Tsunami of December 2004, caused by a 9.0 magnitude earthquake, is the most infamous tsunami of modern times with disastrous consequences in many areas [1]
- humanitarian toll: it affected more than 18 countries from Southeast Asia to Southern Africa, killing more than 250,000 people in a single day and leaving more than one million homeless,
- economic toll: it left several million of dollars of economic loss affecting fishing and tourist industries,
- environmental and medical threats including water pollution and flooding and endemic diseases.
The rationale for writing this paper is to report the tsunami events in the eleven nations bordering the Indian Ocean, as they received less publicity than their Southeast Asian countries counterpart although the 2004 tsunami had real humanitarian, economic, and environmental impact in these regions more than 1,000 miles away from the epicenter [2].
Furthermore, these regions are at risk from the devastating effects of future tsunami due to the presence of a tectonic interactive plate [3], absence of a tsunami warning system in the Indian Ocean, and lack of established communication network providing timely information to that region.
2. Methodology
This paper is a review of documents collected by WHO and other organizations/authors involved in disaster management during the 2004 tsunami.
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Impact of Tsunami in the Islands of the Indian Ocean
These eleven countries bordering the Indian Ocean are Mauritius, Madagascar, Reunion Island, and Seychelles, Comoros islands and by geographical extension include countries in southern borders of Africa such as Somalia, Tanzania, Mozambique, and South Africa.
These individual countries suffered humanitarian loss with more than 3,000 people killed and left more than 10,000 homeless about 1,000 miles away from epicenter. In terms of economic toll, several million dollars were reported accompanied by environmental threat due to flooding.
Specifically included is a country by country report [4] with other south-Asian countries.
(i) Mauritius --
Large waves completely submerged one village in north of the island. Although there was no death published, a significant economic loss in millions of dollars was reported.
(ii) Madagascar --
Waves up to 10 meters were seen in southeastern region of the island. There was one death and more than 1,000 people homeless. Furthermore, there were considerable economic damages inflicted in touristic and fishing industries and infrastructure disruptions due to flooding and beach erosion (http://savannah.gatech.edu/cee/groups/tsunami/madagascar.html).
(iii) Reunion Island --
It suffered mostly economic damages over one million dollars involving fishing industries with more than 200 boats sunk. No deaths were reported.
(iv) Seychelles --
Ten people were reported killed, and flooding destroyed a major bridge between the capital Port Victoria and main airport. Also, the island reported devastating economic loss in millions of dollars due to hotels, housing, public utilities, and fishing damages.
(v) Somalia --
More than 300 deaths were reported and 5,000 displaced.
(vi) Tanzania --
Tsunami killed ten people with unknown number missing along with significant economic damages.
(vii) Kenya --
Two deaths and two injured people were reported.
(viii) South Africa --
8 people were killed about 8,000 km away from the epicenter.
(ix) Indonesia --
122,232 deaths and 113,937 missing.
(xi) Thailand --
5,395 killed and 2,993 missing.
(xiii) Malaysia --
68 deaths reported.
(xv) Bangladesh --
2 killed.
3.2. Lessons Learned from 2004 Tsunami
To prevent the devastating effects of future tsunami, these islands of Indian Ocean have set their priorities in achieving 3 goals [5]:
- development of disaster tsunami program which include implementation of tsunami program at national level, regional, and international levels and coordination of all these programs,
- development of an Indian Ocean early warning system,
- development of tsunami research program.
3.2.1. National Level
The most studied plans are the Madagascar plan, the tsunami early warning and response system in Mauritius, and the creation of the Department of Risk and Disaster Management in Seychelles.
(i) Madagascar Plan --
It was developed in 2006 and is the most exhaustive of all the other national plans and should serve as a model for other islands. It includes 5 objectives:
- development of national evacuation plan on tsunami,
- establishment of early warning system in conjunction with regional system,
- increase public and community awareness through publication and training of media and local authorities,
- conduct mock exercises on tsunami,
- strengthen the operational capacity of national meteorological service to include national warning system.
3.2.2. Regional Level
Disaster management is a regional priority in the Indian Ocean due to permanent threat of cyclones, floods, and tsunamis. The stated two goals set by a series of regional meetings in 2005 and 2006 are [6] the following:
- implementation of Indian Ocean tsunami warning and mitigation system (IOTWS), which focused on defining disaster management and reduction (prevention, mitigation, response and relief) of disaster by all the participating countries,
- development of integrated regional information network (IRIN) with the goals of creation of an early warning system for the islands in the Indian Ocean and ensuring adequate equipment to manage natural disasters including tsunamis.
The important issues are the cost of establishing such warning system in the Indian Ocean, the transfer of existing technology versus improving, old one, global warming and extreme weather events in that region.
3.2.3. International Level
A series of international meetings have been convened to discuss the role international organizations [7]:
- international coordination meeting sponsored by UNESCO intergovernmental oceanographic commission in Mauritius in 2005 with a dual goal:
- development of tsunami warning and mitigation system,
- coordination of national tsunami warning center with regional centers,
- international strategy for disaster reduction (UN/ISDR) attended by representatives from the Indian Ocean countries and international experts on early warning system in 2006 with two objectives:
- funding of projects and rehabilitation of roads and bridges
- increase public awareness and training of key staff in tsunami preparedness and warning at all levels.
3.3. Future and Challenges
The main challenge for all the islands of the Indian Ocean is to coordinate all the national efforts with existing regional and international endeavors to meet their stated priorities before the next tsunami events.
The role of one special group of physicians should be mentioned at all these levels.
Emergency physicians are knowledgeable on the risks of tsunami and are trained in the field of disaster management, thus they are true expert. They should get involve as leaders in local, national, and international organizations as resources in disaster management as well as humanitarian institutions such as Red Cross.
4. Conclusion
This paper is the first peer-reviewed paper on the impact of the 2004 tsunami on the islands bordering the Indian Ocean and the lessons learned from this event from national, regional, and international organizations to prevent such events from occurring again in the future.
Tsunami is an ever-present and real threat for the these islands of the Indian Ocean due to the presence of a tectonic interactive plate.
Their disaster management priority is the development of an early tsunami warning system in order to effectively and timely communicate with all the people in that region.
Disaster management should involve national, regional, and international organizations at all levels in order to develop tsunami program, fund tsunami projects, and continue research program.
References
1. WHO- Situation report on tsunami. http://www.who.int/hac/crises/international/asia_tsunami/en/
2. The world wide web virtual library-2004 tsunami disaster –www.vl. scholarly and factual analyses, March 2005.
3. James DE. Imaging crust and upper mantle beneath southern Africa: the southern Africa broadband seismic experiment. Leading Edge. 2003;22(3):238–249.[Google Scholar]
4. Indian Ocean tsunami disaster December 26,2004 and reconstruction-Coordinates. Online Journal of Map and Geographic Round Table, American Library Association February 2011, http://www.stonybrook.edu/libmap/coordinates.htm.
5. Okal EA, et al. Field survey of the 2004 Indonesian Tsunami in Madagascar. Earthquake Spectra. 2006;22(S3):S263–S283.[Google Scholar]
6. Escaleras MP, Register CA. Mitigating natural disasters through collective action: the effectiveness of Tsunami early warnings. Southern Economic Journal. 2008;74(4):1017–1034.[Google Scholar]
7. Suter K. After the tsunami: the politics of international relief. Contemporary Review. March 2005;286[Google Scholar]
Articles from Emergency Medicine International are provided here courtesy of Hindawi Limited