The starting-point was the agreement on the methodological steps (see BB 1) for the pilot project, including the involvement of key stakeholders and capacity development needs and measures. The upcoming revision of the management plan was an ideal entry-point for the integration of EbA and the work plan the key instrument. It defines that EbA should be treated in thematic meetings with different stakeholder groups and a workshop, in a specific chapter of the management plan and as part of an EbA Action Programme. Training of the core team was then followed by the collection of climate-related data and information which fed into the sessions with communities and a workshop.

Through the elaboration of an EbA Action Program , the EbA approach was institutionally anchored in the protected area “Cananéia-Iguape-Peruíbe”. In addition, the methodological approach will be applied in eleven other protected areas in four federal states of the country through strategic partnerships with the Brazilian Environmental Ministry (MMA), the Brazilian Environmental Agenday (ICMBio) and others. The aspiration is that in the future, all protected area management plans consider EbA as a strategic response to climate change.

The methodological approach consists of the following steps (see also graphic in the gallery):

1. Collection of perceptions of involved professionals and other stakeholders with regard to key climate risks and spatial mapping of these risks.
2. Identification of key biophysical and socio-economic impacts of climate change in the region, in part by checking perceptions of stakeholders, in part by publicly available scientific data.
3. Assessment of ecosystem services relevant for human well-being and/or climate change adaptation with stakeholders during a workshop.
4. Definition of site-specific adaptation options and measures, including EbA.
5. Integration of results into the management plan.
6. Capacity development through courses and on-the-job training as a crucial accompanying measure.

Users of hydrological and meteorological data in Japan have grown significantly in number with the development of new technologies and sectors; from aviation and shipping to public services such as weather forecasting, there is increasing pressure on hydromet services to provide accurate, real-time information.

Today, up-to-date information on severe weather events is provided to the general public by the JMA, in collaboration with central and local disaster management authorities and other key stakeholders. Reaching first responders and the general public is a critical component of Japan’s effective early warning system, and early warnings at the municipality level have improved over the last decade largely in part to better communication and cooperation between stakeholders.

For example, MLIT’s Erosion and Sediment Control Department established a partnership with prefectural governments to promptly issue landslide alert information to at-risk citizens.

The effort to modernize hydrological and meteorological systems in Japan began in the 1950’s and continues to the present day. For example, the JMA Automated Meteorological Data Acquisition System (AMeDAS) is a network of over 1,300 automatic weather stations that was incrementally upgraded from the 1970’s. The system is now capable of collecting data sets from key stations every minute and can deliver information to end-users within 40 seconds. This data serves as a crucial input for early warning systems and enables accurate tracking of weather patterns. Another major milestone has been the series of Geostationary Meteorological Satellites (Himawari-1 to Himawari-8) which have further strengthened hydromet services in not only Japan, but across the Asia-Pacific region. Additionally, the Japan Meteorological Business Support Center (JMBSC) and the Foundation of River & Basin Integrated Communications (FRICS) work to ensure the broader use of hydromet data by municipalities, the general public, and private sector actors.

Key institutions in Japan’s hydromet landscape have evolved since the 1950’s. For example, hydrological institutions have undergone several changes, such as after the enactment of the 1964 River Law Act (revised version). This law required authorities tasked with managing rivers to adhere to integrated river basin management principles, as opposed to more area-focused disaster management practices that were prevalent prior to this (e.g., shifting from circle levees, which only protect the builder’s community, to continuous levees, which ensure more equitable protection for the wider population). As for meteorological services, the regulatory framework was established under the Meteorological Service Act of 1952, which designated the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) as the authoritative body responsible for issuing emergency warnings.

In terms of legal framework, Japan’s laws assign clear roles and responsibilities for the National Hydrological Service (WDMB/MLIT), the National Meteorological Service (JMA), and other key stakeholders to ensure effective coordination.

Non-structural measures for road geohazards are those that do not involve physical construction and are often less expensive that structural measures. For example, Japanese highways often have roadside stations (michi-no-eki), which have been strategically planned to serve as evacuation centers and hubs for disaster-related information (e.g. road conditions and emergency information).  After the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, roadside stations and highway parking areas were used by numerous teams and organizations as operational bases for rescue and relief efforts. Many of them were equipped with electricity, food, and water supplies, and served as emergency shelters, where important information was shared with members of the public.

After the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, the main highways and roads to the affected areas were back up and running within weeks, which greatly expedited relief and recovery operations. This was largely due to robust structural measures, in conjunction with efficient recovery work by public services. In contrast, it took over 1 and a half years for the highway to be reconstructed after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in 1995.

Roads, expressways, and other public facilities helped reduce damage and loss of life in the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake by providing protection against flooding, owing largely to successful risk assessments carried out pre-construction. For example, the East Sendai Expressway (elevation of 7 to 10 meters) acted as a secondary barrier against the incoming tsunami, preventing the waves from penetrating further inland. Over 200 people escaped by running up to the expressway, and its embankment served as an evacuation shelter for local residents.

Relevant institutions in Japan work together to create and enact appropriate laws and regulations, as well as national and local government plans and strategies (e.g., Japan Rail, local government, and Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism collaborating on road geohazard risk management). Japan’s framework also includes institutional and technical coordination, and appropriate funding mechanisms. For example, the cost of adding height to an expressway can be shared by both public works organizations and disaster risk management organizations. These types of cost-sharing mechanisms ensure that financial burdens are shared equitably.