single-dr.php

JDR Vol.11 No.5 pp. 816-829
(2016)
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2016.p0816

Paper:

An Attempt at Quantifying Disaster Damage Based on the Use of Collective Intelligence

Yoshiaki Kawata

Faculty of Safety Science, Kansai University
7-1 Hakubai-cho, Takatsuki-shi, Osaka 569-1098, Japan

Corresponding author,

Received:
June 15, 2016
Accepted:
September 14, 2016
Online released:
October 3, 2016
Published:
October 1, 2016
Keywords:
disaster resilience, socioeconomic damage, collective intelligence, Tokyo inland earthquake, national crisis
Abstract

It is extremely important to evaluate the extent of socioeconomic damage to draw up a disaster preparation program and determine the specifics and their scales when implementing disaster prevention and reduction measures before the occurrence of disasters. Yet, it has only been possible in the past to represent the entire damage costs by part of the damage that could be quantitatively evaluated. This necessarily resulted in underestimation. In this study, the author developed a method in which the descriptions of damage scenarios are collected from over a thousand people and the damage costs evaluated by examining the frequency of used words. Specifically, a questionnaire survey was first conducted to extract the people’s views of disaster, and the frequencies of specific words used in these descriptions of disaster were used as indicators of damage. It was then assumed that the difference in the appearance of these words in newspaper articles before and after an actual disaster represents the damage impact, and this difference was used to estimate the damage costs. The results suggested the possibility of developing an evaluation method based on collective intelligence, as well as the need to improve and refine the method in the future.

Cite this article as:
Y. Kawata, “An Attempt at Quantifying Disaster Damage Based on the Use of Collective Intelligence,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.11, No.5, pp. 816-829, 2016.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] Y. Kawata, “Disaster Resilience Requested in Global Cities,” Urban Problem, Vol.106, pp. 72-79, 2015.
  2. [2] Y. Kawata, “Realization of Disaster Resilience with Community Empowerment,” Nature Protection, No.550, pp. 4-5, 2016.
  3. [3] Y. Kawata, K. Pak, and Y. Karatani, “Study on Estimation of Disaster Prevention Potential – The Application to Total Loss Estimation –,” Annuals of APRI, Kyoto University, Vol.41, B-2, pp. 77-87, 1998.
  4. [4] Y. Kawata and Y. Karatani, “Quantitative Estimation of Indirect Damage Due to Large Scale Live Loss,” Proc. of 2nd Workshop for “Comparative Study on Urban Earthquake Disaster Management, pp. 1-7, 2002.
  5. [5] Central Disaster Prevention Council, “Final Report on Damage Estimation and Countermeasure of Nankai Trough Earthquake,” 2013, http://www.bousai.go.jp/jishin/nankai/taisaku_wg/pdf/20130528_honbun.pdf [accessed Sep. 28, 2016]
  6. [6] Central Disaster Prevention Council, “Final Report on Damage Estimation and Countermeasure of Tokyo Inland Earthquake,” 2013, http://www.bousai.go.jp/jishin/syuto/taisaku_wg/pdf/syuto_wg_report.pdf [accessed Sep. 28, 2016]
  7. [7] Y. Kawata, “Characteristics of Urban Disaster and Its damage Scenario,” Natural Disaster Science, Vol.10, No.1, pp. 33-45, 1991.
  8. [8] Y. Kawata, “Urban Mega-Disaster,” Kinmiraisha, p. 233, 1995.
  9. [9] Y. Kawata, “An Example of Comparative Disaster Study – Disaster Management on Urban Earthquake and Urban Flooding –,” Proc. of 1st Workshop for Comparative Study on Urban Earthquake Disaster Management, pp. 1-10, 2001.
  10. [10] Y. Kawata, “The Great East Japan Earthquake as Large Scale Compound Disaster,” Review of The Great East Japan Earthquake, Minerva-shobo, pp. 1-31, 2012.
  11. [11] S. Tatsuki, “Sociology on Disaster and Reconstruction,” Kizasu-shobo, p. 250, 2016.
  12. [12] T. Nishigaki, “What is Collective Intelligence,” Cyuko-shinsyo, p. 220, 2013.
  13. [13] J. Surowiecki, “The Wisdom of Crowds,” Kadokawa-shoten, p. 336, 2006.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Dec. 11, 2018