Introduction

This final chapter sums up the key findings of both parts of this book: Part A on key insights into current practices of disaster risk mitigation and recovery in five different countries; and Part B on a cross-country analysis of the following five important topics – the transformation of spatial planning after significant disasters; efforts in building spatial resilience after disasters; coordination in building spatial resilience after disasters; participation in rebuilding more resilient space; and spatial planning and uncertainties.

Rebuilding from the Great East Japan Earthquake and the subsequent tsunami in 2011 has been a turning point for spatial planning in Japan. There is certainly a nationwide momentum to link risk management and spatial planning. In this context, different relocation strategies were identified: (1) ‘Grouped’ or ‘Scattered’; (2) ‘New development’ or ‘Infill development’; and (3) ‘Land-use change’ or ‘No change’. The reconstruction efforts have made steady progress in the most affected Tohoku region. Local mitigation plans consider the decline of the population as an important framework condition for building back better. That is a very useful approach that should be adopted in other countries faced by a shrinking population.

Learning from the experience in Aceh, Indonesia, indicates that the implementation of rehabilitation and reconstruction after disasters should not be limited to physical reconstruction efforts only. Development of social resilience and, in particular, the socialisation and training of spatial planning and disaster risk reduction efforts is also urgently required in other countries. Although the local Village Plans were, in general, considered a success, there were some drawbacks. This was mainly due to the absence of comprehensive planning at the city level and the lack of a sound risk assessment as an evidence basis for decision-making on reconstruction. Moreover, there is still a need for integrating and better coordinating disaster response activities among all relevant stakeholders. In particular, the relation and coordination with the national government level still has to be improved. That is quite relevant for various other countries in the Global South.

The role of spatial planning in the context of both disaster mitigation and recovery is relatively new in the US. The recovery process after Hurricane Sandy (which hit New York in 2012) represents the most recent example of recovery and shows how spatial planning and risk reduction can be integrated.