The outline of disaster management and integrated disaster reduction systems were presented. The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Disaster gave us many lessons which will contribute to reduction of human and property damage due to coming urban disasters. Disaster management as emergency management can be divided into risk management and crisis management. Disaster information management is the most important to reduce the damage. The disaster reduction systems with information management can be proposed with combination of pre-disaster risk management and post-disaster crisis management. In order to get good aftermath recovery, it is necessary to enlarge the concept of mitigation in disaster management. In this paper, social mitigation was defined as humane technology which includes ecological infrastructure and amenity infrastructure. The former forcuses on cut-off of energy, circulation utility of water and other natural resources, reduction of public nuisance and recovery of green forest zone in urban environment. The latter has environmental efforts such as safety and security, convenient access for public sectors, economics, culture and information. Improvement recovery means not only enforcement of structural infrastructure such as lifeline systems and buildings but also natural and social environment recovery.
1. INTRODUCTION
The 1995 Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Disaster (magnitude: M=7.2 on the JMA scale) came about on 5:46 of 17 January. The disaster was the worst after the world war II in our country. The destruction resulting from the earthquake included damage to, or the collapse of, some 200,000 buildings (mostly, old wooden houses and concrete buildings) and an estimated area of 90ha blackened by fires that erupted in more than 200 locations. Moreover, damage to highway, railway and waterway systems, which halted transport of people and logistics, along with disruption of utilities such as gas, electricity, water and sewage, produced a widespread and long-term cessation of lifeline functions. Reclaimed land along the coastline liquefied causing deformation and exacerbating damage. As a result of structural collapse and ensuing fires, the death toll was 6,308, the missing was two and the number of the injured was more than 38,000 and estimated direct property damage, and indirect and secondary one were about $100 and 200 billion respectively. At its peak, over 300,000 residents sought refuge in emergency shelters. The aftermath and the impact on the affected population and economics are expected to be a source of continued controversy. During this 30 years, we have never had the natural disaster with the death toll of more than 300. And also this is truly urban disasters which has never been experienced in our highly complicate and densely populated urban areas. Historically, our emergency management as disaster one was very poor in every local government level as well as Japanese government. After one and half year of the 1995 disaster, about 45,000 residents were still obliged to stay at temporal housing units. We would like to introduce characteristics of catastrophic urban disaster, its management systems and disaster lessons.
2. CATASTROPHIC NATURAL DISASTERS
2.1 Characteristics of urban disasters
In order to manage natural disasters, we have to understand revolution of the disasters. Damage processes have changed by social environment as well as natural one. The major factor of the revolution is urbanization in which vulnerability has increased due to imbalance between construction of infrastructures and increment of population. This imbalance is typically appeared at a cluster of tall intelligent buildings surrounded by slum in
