This study presents a comparative analysis of post-earthquake recovery governance in Türkiye and Japan, focusing on the 1999 Kocaeli, 2011 Tōhoku, and 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes. Employing qualitative document analysis and cross-case timeline mapping, it evaluates the legal, administrative, and institutional mechanisms shaping recovery trajectories. Key indicators—such as time to restore essential services, housing delivery speed, and coordination intensity—were extracted from publicly available sources (AFAD, MLIT, EM-DAT) and coded against governance structures. Türkiye’s centralized model enables rapid emergency response but faces coordination bottlenecks, procurement delays, and limited stakeholder participation. In contrast, Japan’s decentralized system, governed by the Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act, shows greater agility through statutory delegation, inclusive recovery councils, and transparency. A comparative policy matrix underscores Türkiye’s challenges—such as institutional overlap and reactive laws—while highlighting Japan’s strengths, including early stakeholder engagement and implementation of the “Build Back Better” principle. The study concludes that governance efficiency depends not only on institutional capacity but also legal clarity, coordination, and participation. It offers recommendations including legal preparedness, simulation exercises, real-time dashboards, and structured decentralization—contributing to the global discourse on institutional resilience and post-disaster recovery.  

Keywords - Post-earthquake recovery, disaster governance, institutional resilience, coordination effectiveness, legal preparedness, decentralized disaster response, disaster risk reduction, Türkiye and Japan

[1] EM-DAT. (2023). Emergency Events Database. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). [Online]. Available: www.emdat.be

[2] USGS. (2023). Significant Earthquakes Archive. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). [Online]. Available: www.usgs.gov

[3] L. K. Comfort, A. Boin, and C. C. Demchak, Designing resilience: Preparing for extreme events. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Univ. Pittsburgh Press, 2010.

[4] N. Kapucu, "Collaborative emergency management: Better community organizing, better public preparedness and response," Disasters, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 239–262, 2008.

[5] A. Mukherji, N. E. Ganapati, and B. Manandhar, "Panacea or problem: New governance structures for disaster recovery," Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 52, Art. no. 101960, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101960

[6] AFAD. (2000). 1999 İzmit Depremi Raporu (1999 İzmit Earthquake Report). Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD).

[7] Resmî Gazete. (2009). Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı Kuruluş Kanunu (Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency Establishment Law), no. 5902.

[8] Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı. (2012). Kentsel Dönüşüm Mevzuatı (Urban Transformation Legislation). Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (MEU).

[9] Y. Kaneko, "Balancing of the state responsibility for safety and disaster victims’ right of reconstruction," in Build Back Better, T. Toyoda, J. Wang, and Y. Kaneko, Eds. Singapore: Springer, 2021, pp. 35–50. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-5979-9_3

[10] T. Takeda, "Development of a coordination system: Lessons learned in earthquakes in Nepal and Japan," Prehosp. Disaster Med., vol. 32, no. S1, p. S128, 2017. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X17003600

[11] AFAD. (2023). 2023 Kahramanmaraş Depremi Değerlendirme Raporu (2023 Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Evaluation Report). Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD).

[12] TBMM. (2023). Kahramanmaraş Depremi Araştırma Komisyonu Raporu (Kahramanmaraş Earthquake Research Commission Report). Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM).

[13] TMMOB. (2023). 2023 Deprem İzleme ve Değerlendirme Raporları (2023 Earthquake Monitoring and Evaluation Reports). Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB).

[14] TEPAV. (2023). Afet Yönetimi Performans Değerlendirme Raporu (Disaster Management Performance Evaluation Report). Economic Policy Research Foundation of Türkiye (TEPAV).

[15] TBMM. (2023). Deprem Araştırma Komisyonu Raporları (Earthquake Research Commission Reports). Grand National Assembly of Türkiye (TBMM).

[16] A. Cho, "Post-tsunami recovery and reconstruction: Governance issues and implications of the Great East Japan Earthquake," Disasters, vol. 38, no. Suppl 2, pp. S157–S178, 2014. doi: 10.1111/disa.12068

[17] G. A. Bowen, "Document analysis as a qualitative research method," Qual. Res. J., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 27–40, 2009.

[18] A. Egawa and N. Mori, "Efforts to grasp progresses of recovery and reconstruction following the Great East Japan Earthquake," J. Geogr., vol. 130, no. 2, pp. 289–302, 2021. doi: 10.5026/jgeography.130.289

[19] UNDRR. (2022). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2022: Our World at Risk – Transforming Governance for a Resilient Future. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). [Online]. Available: https://www.undrr.org/gar/gar2022-our-world-risk-gar

[20] D. Beach and R. B. Pedersen, Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines. Ann Arbor, MI, USA: Univ. Michigan Press, 2019.

[21] A. L. George and A. Bennett, Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2005.

[22] B. Temple and A. Young, "Qualitative research and translation dilemmas," Qual. Res., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 161–178, 2004.

[23] C. Scawthorn and G. Johnson, "Preliminary report: Kocaeli (Izmit) Earthquake of 17 August 1999," Eng. Struct., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 727–745, 2000. doi: 10.1016/S0141-0296(99)00106-6

[24] Ö. Aydan, M. Hamada, and J. Bardet, "Liquefaction induced lateral spreading in the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake," Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., vol. 22, no. 9–12, pp. 1083–1092, 2002.

[25] TMMOB. (2001). 1999 İzmit Depremi Teknik Değerlendirme Raporu (1999 İzmit Earthquake Technical Evaluation Report). Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB).

[26] M. Ş. Balaban et al., "Emergency response and community impact after February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaraş Pazarcık and Elbistan earthquakes: Reconnaissance findings and observations on affected region in Türkiye," Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 23, pp. 1053–1081, 2025. doi: 10.1007/s10518-024-01867-3

[27] A. Demir, "Post-earthquake structural damage assessment, lessons learned, and addressing objections following the 2023 Kahramanmaras, Turkey earthquakes," Bull. Earthq. Eng., vol. 23, pp. 1107–1127, 2025. doi: 10.1007/s10518-024-02092-8

[28] IFRC. (2023). Türkiye Earthquake: Situation Report. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC).

[29] TEPAV. (2023). Deprem Sonrası İyileşme Değerlendirme Raporları (Post-Earthquake Recovery Evaluation Reports). Economic Policy Research Foundation of Türkiye (TEPAV).

[30] TOKİ. (2024). Afet Konutları İhale ve Süreç Raporu (Disaster Housing Tender and Process Report). Housing Development Administration of Türkiye (TOKİ).

[31] A. Akinci, "Strong ground motion characteristics from the 17 August 1999 Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake," Boll. Geofis. Teor. Appl., vol. 43, pp. 37–52, 2002.

[32] C. Cosson, "From emergency shelter towards disaster-relief housing—Tōhoku’s reconstruction case study," Bud. Archit., vol. 20, pp. 035–046, 2021. doi: 10.35784/bud-arch.1587

[33] D. W. Edgington, "Population and housing recovery in Tōhoku, Japan," Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 89, Art. no. 104060, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.104060

[34] K. Iuchi, E. Maly, and L. Johnson, "Three years after a mega-disaster: Recovery policies, programs and implementation after the Great East Japan Earthquake," in Post-tsunami hazard, V. Santiago-Fandiño, Y. Kontar, and Y. Kaneda, Eds. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2015, pp. 29–46. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-10202-3_3

[35] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası. (2017). Anayasa Değişiklikleri ile Cumhurbaşkanlığı Hükümet Sistemi (Constitutional Amendments and the Presidential Government System).

[36] Resmî Gazete. (2018). Cumhurbaşkanlığı Kararnameleri (Presidential Decrees).

[37] TOKİ. (2023). Afet Konutları ve İmar Süreçleri Raporu (Disaster Housing and Zoning Processes Report). Housing Development Administration of Türkiye (TOKİ).

[38] Çevre, Şehircilik ve İklim Değişikliği Bakanlığı. (2024). 2023 Yılı Yatırım İzleme ve Değerlendirme Raporu (2023 Investment Monitoring and Evaluation Report). Ministry of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change (MEUCC).

[39] E. Orhan, "1999 depremlerinin ardından planlama mevzuatı üzerine bir değerlendirme," J. Plan., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 45–60, 2021.

[40] Resmî Gazete. (1959). Afet Kanunu (Disaster Law), no. 7269.

[41] Cabinet Office Japan. (2020). Disaster Countermeasures Basic Act – English Summary. [Online]. Available: https://www.bousai.go.jp/english/laws/index.html

[42] MLIT. (2011). Recovery and Rehabilitation Plan after the Great East Japan Earthquake. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Japan. [Online]. Available: https://www.mlit.go.jp/common/000161202.pdf

[43] Y. Kaneko, "Reconstruction of communities: Lessons from Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake and East Japan Earthquake," in Community-based reconstruction of society, A. Hokugo and Y. Kaneko, Eds. Singapore: Springer, 2017, pp. 15–30. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-5463-1_2

[44] M. Ishiwatari, A. Sakamoto, and M. Nakayama, "Expediting recovery: Lessons and challenges from the Great East Japan Earthquake," Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 3, Art. no. 1210, 2025. doi: 10.3390/su17031210

[45] Y. Kaneko, Law and community in disaster recovery: Lessons from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake on the outcomes of civil rights. Tokyo, Japan: Univ. Tokyo Press, 2013.

[46] S. Platt and E. So, "Speed or deliberation: A comparison of post-disaster recovery in Japan, Turkey, and Chile," Disasters, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 696–727, 2017. doi: 10.1111/disa.12219

[47] E. Maly, "Ten years into recovery after the Great East Japan Earthquake," J. Sustain., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 44–57, 2021. doi: 10.24910/jsustain/7.3/4457

[48] Koç Üniversitesi DISLAB. (2023). Eğitim Sürekliliği ve Deprem Raporu (Education Continuity and Earthquake Report). Koç University Disaster Research Laboratory (DISLAB).

[49] S. K. Sezgin et al., "Reconnaissance report on damage caused by the February 6, 2023, Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes," J. Build. Eng., vol. 82, Art. no. 109200, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.109200

[50] O. Murao, "Regional comparison of temporary housing construction processes after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami," in Tohoku recovery, R. Shaw, Ed. Tokyo, Japan: Springer, 2015, pp. 45–60. doi: 10.1007/978-4-431-55136-2_4

[51] M. Taş, N. Tas, and N. Coşgun, "Study on permanent housing production after 1999 earthquake in Kocaeli (Turkey)," Disaster Prev. Manag., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 6–19, 2010. doi: 10.1108/09653561011022108

[52] B. G. Tan and O. Özcan, "Exploring residents’ expectations and designers’ perspectives towards post-earthquake permanent housing: A case study in Antakya," Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 102, Art. no. 104873, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104873

[53] N. Fatsa and S. Akdaş, "An analysis of post-disaster recovery efforts in Turkey," ASSAM J., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 45–62, 2023. doi: 10.58724/assam.1362743

[54] Resmî Gazete. (2023). Cumhurbaşkanlığı Kararları: Afet Sonrası İdari Düzenlemeler (Presidential Decisions: Post-Disaster Administrative Regulations).

[55] MEB. (2023). Deprem Sonrası Eğitim İyileştirme Raporu (Post-Earthquake Education Improvement Report). Ministry of National Education (MEB).

[56] Denge ve Denetleme Ağı. (2023). Afetlerde Sivil Toplum: Bir Arada Dayanışma Toplantıları – Sorunlar, Deneyimler ve Çözümler (Civil Society in Disasters: Solidarity Meetings – Problems, Experiences, and Solutions). [Online]. Available: https://www.sivilsayfalar.org/2023/05/04/denge-ve-denetleme-agindan-afetlerde-sivil-toplum-raporu/

[57] UNDRR. (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). [Online]. Available: https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030

[58] MLIT. (2015). Report on Flood Disaster Risk Reduction against Large-Scale Inundations. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Japan. [Online]. Available: https://www.mlit.go.jp/river/mizubousaivision/toushin_e/1512_toushin_e.pdf

[59] Reconstruction Agency. (2014). Annual Reports on Tōhoku Recovery (2012–2015). Government of Japan.

[60] A. Saylam, "Türk kamu yönetiminde merkezi düzeyde e-katılım: Bakanlıkların web siteleri üzerinden bir araştırma," Pamukkale Univ. J. Soc. Sci. Inst., vol. 42, pp. 123–145, 2020. doi: 10.30794/pausbed.726295

[61] MLIT. (2020). Launch of the National Land and Transport Data Platform: Integration of approximately 220,000 data points on land and infrastructure begins! Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Japan. [Online]. Available: https://www.mlit.go.jp/report/press/kanbo08_hh_000687.html

[62] TMMOB. (2023). TMMOB 6 Şubat 2023 Depremleri Sekizinci Ay Değerlendirme Raporu (TMMOB February 6, 2023 Earthquakes Eighth Month Evaluation Report). Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects (TMMOB). [Online]. Available: https://www.tmmob.org.tr/icerik/tmmob-6-subat-depremleri-8-ay-degerlendirme-raporu-yayimlandi

[63] K. Wasley, Pre-disaster recovery planning: Lessons from Japan. Tokyo, Japan: Univ. Tokyo Press, 2014.

[64] S. Biswas et al., "An AI-based framework for earthquake relief demand forecasting: A case study in Türkiye," Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct., vol. 104, Art. no. 104287, 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.104287

[65] S. Nazlioglu, G. Kalem, and A. Yazici, "Digital solutions for disaster management: Analyzing the impact of the February 2023 earthquake in Türkiye," J. Disaster Risk, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 45–67, 2024. doi: 10.35341/afet.1336337

[66] H. Hayashi, K. Tamura, and R. Kimura, "Mini Special Issue on the Role of Quantitative Questionnaire Surveys on the 'Build Back Better' Component of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030): The Life Recovery Survey Five Years After the Great East Japan Earthquake," J. Disaster Res., vol. 17, no. 2, p. 163, 2022.

[67] Y. Sun, "Lessons from disaster recovery in Japan through case studies of four earthquakes," in Community, Environment and Disaster Risk Management, vol. 18. Bingley, UK: Emerald, 2017, pp. 45–68. doi: 10.1108/S2040-726220160000018004

[68] M. Ishiwatari, "Institution and governance related learning from the East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami," in Disaster recovery, R. Shaw, Ed. Tokyo, Japan: Springer, 2014, pp. 55–72. doi: 10.1007/978-4-431-54255-1_5

[69] World Bank. (2022). Open Data for Resilience Initiative Toolkit: Resilient Recovery Guide. [Online]. Available: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/37408

[70] H. Öğredik, T. Avaner, and M. M. Uzun, "A conceptual approach on disaster response management and the legality of disaster response: A case study on February 6 Kahramanmaraş Earthquakes in Türkiye and presidential decrees under the state of emergency," Selçuk Univ. J. Law Fac., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 679–716, 2024. doi: 10.15337/suhfd.1434687

[71] S. R. Kim and H. Kim, "A comparative analysis of earthquake management in Pohang and Japan," J. Earthq. Eng. Soc. Korea, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 193–199, 2018. doi: 10.5000/EESK.2018.22.3.193

[72] H. Hermansson, "Challenges to decentralization of disaster management in Turkey," Int. J. Public Adm., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 417–431, 2019. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2018.1466898

[73] E. Caymaz, F. V. Akyon, and F. Erenel, "A model proposal for efficient disaster management: The Turkish sample," Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 99, pp. 609–618, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.531

[74] H. Metin, "Public services provided after Earthquake 2023 in the context of central government-local administration relations: Mersin Metropolitan Municipality case," J. Soc. Sci. Educ., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 25–50, 2024. doi: 10.53047/josse.1452201

[75] World Bank. (2017). Learning from Disaster Simulation Drills in Japan. [Online]. Available: http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26708

[76] D. W. Edgington, "Planning for earthquakes and tsunamis: Lessons from Japan for British Columbia, Canada," Prog. Plan., vol. 151, Art. no. 100626, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.progress.2021.100626

[77] N. Kapucu, "Disaster resilience and adaptive capacity in Turkey and the United States," J. Comp. Policy Anal., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 202–216, 2012. doi: 10.1080/13876988.2012.687620