Mitigation Lessons from the July 17, 1998 Papua New Guinea Tsunami

Abstract

The July 17, 1998 tsunami killed over 2,100 people, injured at least 800 severely enough to require hospitalization, permanently displaced over 10,000 and disrupted the social and economic framework of the coastal communities of eastern Saundaun Province, Papua New Guinea. Initial response to the disaster was delayed 16 hours because of the failure to communicate the magnitude of the impact outside the affected area. Once the scope of the disaster was known, international assistance was rapid and substantial. Medical teams, supplies, air transport and mobile field hospitals were provided to assist national medical personnel and facilities. Seven care centers were established for the displaced survivors. Nineteen countries and 17 NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) donated money, relief and rebuilding supplies valued at over 6 million US$ in addition to substantial contributions from national recovery funds and the Catholic Diocese. The three Malol villages, two Arop, four Sissano and the Warupu village were permanently abandoned and new villages established inland. Closure of the lagoon and restriction of coastal fishing impacted adjacent villages as well as tsunami survivors. By the second anniversary of the tsunami construction of schools, water and sanitation systems and some roads had been completed. Survivors were provided tools and building supplies to construct new homes, canoes and fishing equipment. Relief and recovery efforts were complicated by coordination difficulties among the many responding agencies and organizations, the disruption of daily routines for both survivors and villages hosting the care centers, and the intrusion of outside aid workers in a region that had been isolated before the disaster. Adaptation to the new village sites has been difficult due to their inland locations that are hotter, more insect-infested and have water and sanitation difficulties. The high number of casualties from the tsunami was the result of several factors:Population concentrated in the area of maximum tsunami impact. Date and time of occurrence. Siting of villages on vulnerable sand spits. Failure of residents to self-evacuate after feeling the earthquake. Substantial delay in mobilizing response.However, further losses were likely reduced because of the rapid deployment of air transport and medical teams, and massive international relief support. The tsunami has affected long-term tsunami mitigation in the Sissano region through the relocation of villages, heightened awareness and education programs. It has also had a significant effect on mitigation in other countries by illuminating the potential dangers of landslide-generated tsunamis and in media coverage of tsunami hazards.

Environmental and socioeconomic dynamics of the Indian Ocean tsunami in Penang, Malaysia

“…The eyewitness accounts of the Penang tsunami are similar to those in other tsunami studies (e.g. Dudley & Lee, 1998; Dengler & Preuss, 2003). Many people were knocked over by the first wave, and most survivors described three significant waves.…”

“…Although eyewitness accounts were useful in terms of reconstructing the tsunami event, descriptions varied considerably. This was likely the result of the general confusion that surrounded the tsunami but also reflects each person's unique experience of the event and their individual circumstances and memory errors (Neisser & Hyman, 2000; Dengler & Preuss, 2003). Some fisherfolk out at sea were completely unaware of the tsunami until they returned to find their jetty and fishing boats in disarray.…”

“…Most notably, many eyewitnesses described a significant initial drawdown of the water surface, which at Pulau Betong exposed up to 1.5 km of the sea floor. As in many other tsunami disasters some people ignored this warning sign and went out onto the exposed platform to gather marine life (Dudley & Lee, 1998; Dengler & Preuss, 2003). The first wave was accompanied by extremely loud sounds, variously described as a jet plane, helicopter, train or bomb (Lander & Lockridge, 1989).…”

“…We were particularly interested in the social milieu in which livelihood impacts and patterns of local and institutional response by different groups took place (e.g. Davies et al ., 2003; Dengler & Preuss, 1999; 2003; Stone, 2005). We therefore assessed the impact of the tsunami on people's actions, public services and communication, as well as the effectiveness of the response plans (Mileti & Sorensen, 1990; Mileti & O'Brien, 1992; Morrow et al ., 1997; Covan et al ., 2000; Rocha & Christoplos, 2001; Whitehead, 2002; Shaw & Goda, 2004; Thomalla & Schmuck, 2004; Buranakul et al ., 2005).…”

Reassessing the environmental context of the Aitape Skull – The oldest tsunami victim in the world?

“…In such environments, many bodies become buried in sediment sinks (the lagoon) and are unlikely to be retrieved [ 65 ]. Following the 1998 PNG event, attempts to retrieve victims from the lagoon were called off a week after the tsunami because crocodiles were feeding on the corpses, but dismembered bodies continued to be found in subsequent days [ 66 , 67 ]. A similar set of events during the mid-Holocene could account for the Aitape Skull.…”