On the afternoon of March 11, 2011, the Great East Japan Earthquake struck Tokyo with an intensity of 5 on the Japanese seismic scale of 7, causing widespread train and bus cancellations.

The disruption left 3.52 million people in Tokyo unable to return home.

If an earthquake with a magnitude of 7.3 centered in the southern portion Tokyo’s 23 wards occurs, it is expected that approximately 4.53 million people will have difficulty returning home.

Tokyo officials and others have been hurrying to prepare for the next major disaster by setting up “temporary stay facilities” where stranded people can take shelter.

But is Tokyo ready for the next major disaster?

FACILITIES FOR 660,000 PEOPLE NEEDED

One hundred and one years after the Great Kanto Earthquake, which killed more than 105,000 people, the answer is still “No.”

There are not enough temporary stay facilities to accept all the people who would be stranded throughout the city after a major disaster in Tokyo.

Officials have estimated that about 660,000 people would need such facilities in the event of an earthquake striking directly under the Tokyo metropolitan area.

But as of January this year, Tokyo metropolitan government officials said they have only secured enough temporary stay facilities to accommodate 471,270 people, about 71 percent of what is needed.

The cities of Osaka, Nagoya and Fukuoka have not secured the necessary number of stay facilities either.

To prevent crowd crushes and emergency vehicles getting stuck due to congestion, the central government and the Tokyo metropolitan government have said a basic measure is to discourage people from returning home all at once.

To achieve this, temporary stay facilities are needed for shoppers, tourists and others who have nowhere else to go.

Specifically, public facilities such as government buildings and gymnasiums, as well as hotels and office buildings of cooperating businesses, are needed.

According to the Cabinet Office guideline, temporary stay facilities are places where people can stay “in principle for three days after the disaster” until they can safely begin returning home.

The guideline states that “a floor space of 3.3 square meters should accommodate two people.”

The facility manager will distribute stockpiled food, water, blankets and other goods, and will also be responsible for collecting and providing damage information, the guideline says.

In a survey conducted this year by the Tokyo Chamber of Commerce and Industry for its member companies, 37 percent of the 1,157 companies that responded said it would be difficult to accommodate those who are unable to go home.

The main reasons cited were a lack of space and manpower, and difficulties in stockpiling emergency supplies.

The Tokyo metropolitan government has provided support to private businesses by covering more than 80 percent of the cost of purchasing stockpiles and exempting stockpile warehouses from property and other taxes.

In fiscal 2023, the metropolitan government also began dispatching corporate disaster prevention experts to consult with private facilities on how to operate in the event of a disaster.

Thanks to these efforts, the metropolitan government in 2023 secured 33 new locations to accommodate about 21,000 more people.

The goal is to secure facilities for about 590,000 people by fiscal 2030.

"We would like to cooperate with municipalities to explain the significance of this program and request cooperation from private facilities,” said a metropolitan government official.

MANY OF TOKYO'S 23 WARDS NOT READY

On the other hand, a survey of Tokyo’s 23 wards conducted by the association of 23 wards’ mayors in fiscal 2023 found that 13 wards cited “not enough candidate facilities” and nine wards cited “not enough staff” as obstacles in securing facilities.

Some potential facilities declined to participate, citing the “inability to prepare an initial response system” and said, “We can’t provide compensation in the event of accidents.” 

What happens if a facility accepts stranded people who are then injured by aftershocks or other hazards?

The Cabinet Office has provided an example of how to handle such a situation, including signing an agreement in advance that stipulates immunity from liability.

But an official of one of the 23 wards said that example “is unrealistic in times of turmoil.”

Some wards have stated that the ward will assume responsibility on behalf of the facility, but there is no specific provision.

The ward official said, “The actual scope of compensation is gray.”

The Tokyo metropolitan government has requested that the central government establish a law, but the Cabinet Office said it is “continuing to consider how to deal with the situation.”

OTHER MAJOR CITIES FACING SHORTFALLS

Securing temporary accommodations in the event of a large-scale earthquake is an issue in other cities as well.

The Osaka city government has so far secured facilities for about 54,000 people, but it is estimated that the city needs facilities for 63,000.

The city is aiming to secure the necessary number by the end of fiscal 2024, in preparation for the 2025 Osaka Kansai Expo.

For Fukuoka, it is estimated that facilities that can accommodate about 38,000 people are needed. The city government said it still needs to secure facilities for about 6,000 more people.

For Nagoya, it is estimated that facilities for about 76,000 people are needed. The city government said it still needs to secure facilities for about 24,000 more people.

Of the 960 temporary stay facilities in Tokyo’s 23 wards, at least 202, or 21 percent, are not publicized as temporary stay facilities, according to the metropolitan government and the governments of 23 wards.

Although this information is useful for people to know in advance, the facilities have their own reasons for not publicizing it.

Those that are undisclosed are mainly private facilities.

These will be announced by local governments once they are opened at the time of a disaster.

The Cabinet Office’s guideline for temporary stay facilities states that “in principle, they should be publicized,” but that private facilities “may choose not to disclose their status” if they so desire.

This has resulted in differences among wards, with Koto and Shinagawa wards not disclosing the locations of all emergency stay facilities, while nine others, such as Edogawa and Chuo, do.

An official of a ward with undisclosed facilities said, “Depending on the situation, the facility may not be opened. If we announce it in advance, there is a risk of being misunderstood that the facility will be opened without fail.”

On the other hand, an official of a high-rise building, which has not been disclosed to the public as a temporary stay facility, said, “Honestly, we don’t want a large number of people from the outside to come.”

In the event of a major disaster, the first priority is to ensure the safety of the building’s interior, where there are many offices and stores, said the official.

But if a lot of of stranded people come to the building before that, “We will not be able to handle them,” the official said.

To accept a large number of people, it is necessary to legislate immunity from liability for accidents during their stay and to enhance the system in which stranded people can also help run the facility, the official said.

Toshihiro Osaragi, a professor of urban disaster prevention at Tokyo University of Technology, said, “it is desirable to be able to confirm the location and scale of facilities on a regular basis,” as it may be impossible to confirm information during a disaster due to communication disruptions.

However, to facilitate cooperation from the private sector, Osaragi points out the need for a system in which private operators are exempted from legal liability for accidents that occur during their stay, and for the central and local governments to assume liability for compensation.

On the night of the Great East Japan Earthquake, the main roads in Tokyo were packed with people trying to walk home.

For this reason, Osaragi said, “It is important not only to secure the number of facilities, but also to predict shortages in each area and make efforts to fill the gaps in advance.”

(This article was written by Natsuno Otahara and Ryo Takeda.)