Skip to main content

Disaster in Japan: A Case Study

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the response in Japan to the triple disaster that ravaged the east coast on 11 March 2011. The chapter addresses three successive phases. First, preparing for the disaster: lessons learned in disaster management from the Kobe earthquake in 1995; ‘the nuclear village’ controlling Japan’s nuclear energy supply; and reasons for the dangerous location of nuclear plants along the eastern coast of Honshu, so close to the sea. Second, coping with the disaster: the lack of strong political leadership in the Japanese Diet when joint national leadership was most needed, which was counterbalanced by infrastructure measures and an emergency social coordination network for effective volunteering already in place. Third, planning for the future: rebuilding Tohoku; deciding on Japan’s future energy policy; and relocating more than 100,000 people. While this brief study discusses Japan only, it shows that in managing disasters, governments must assume control and coordination based on community needs and support. Because of the nature and complexity of disasters, preparedness can only ever be achieved to a limited degree.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    According to one commentator: ‘Experts and the Government say that there have been no visible effects from the radioactive contamination from the Fukushima Daiichi plant so far. But they also warn that even low-dose radiation carries some risk of cancer and other diseases, and exposure should be avoided as much as possible, especially the intake of contaminated food and water. Such risks are higher for children and even higher for foetuses, and may not appear for years:’ Kageyama (2012).

  2. 2.

    For example, two high-profile networks were the Nippon Volunteer Network Active in Disaster (NVNAD) and the Nishinomiya Volunteer Network, a collaborative state-civil group. See Avenell (2012), pp. 58–59.

  3. 3.

    Kuznick and Tanaka (2011).

  4. 4.

    Tanaka (2011).

  5. 5.

    Aldrich (2012), p. 132.

  6. 6.

    Scalise (2012), p. 151.

  7. 7.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 199.

  8. 8.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 201.

  9. 9.

    Tanaka (2011).

  10. 10.

    Tanaka (2011).

  11. 11.

    World Bank (2012), p. 3.

  12. 12.

    World Bank (2012), p. 16.

  13. 13.

    World Bank (2012), p. 13.

  14. 14.

    Avenell (2012), p. 63.

  15. 15.

    Kawato et al. (2012), p. 83.

  16. 16.

    Kawato et al. (2012), p. 83.

  17. 17.

    Slater et al. (2012), p. 97.

  18. 18.

    Kawato et al. (2012), p. 85.

  19. 19.

    Kawato et al. (2012), p. 88.

  20. 20.

    For informative detail on the civil response I am deeply indebted to Simon Avenell’s extensive study: Avenell (2012).

  21. 21.

    Nakahara (2011).

  22. 22.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 189.

  23. 23.

    Kingston (2012a), p. 7.

  24. 24.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 189.

  25. 25.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 185.

  26. 26.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 193.

  27. 27.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 194.

  28. 28.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 194.

  29. 29.

    Broinowski (2012), p. 223.

  30. 30.

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is an independent agency of the US Government. The NRC oversees reactor safety and security, radioactive material safety, and spent fuel management. By 14 March 2011, 11 staff had been despatched to Japan to provide technical assistance to the Japanese Government: United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2013).

  31. 31.

    Kingston (2012a), p. 3.

  32. 32.

    Kingston (2012a), p. 6.

  33. 33.

    Clenfield (2011).

  34. 34.

    McCurry (2012b).

  35. 35.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 190.

  36. 36.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 190.

  37. 37.

    Kingston (2012b), pp. 190–191.

  38. 38.

    Bird (2012).

  39. 39.

    Prime Minister’s Office (2011).

  40. 40.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 198.

  41. 41.

    Kingston (2012b), p. 189.

  42. 42.

    World Nuclear Association (2013).

  43. 43.

    See more generally, Suter (2013), in this volume.

  44. 44.

    Asahi Shimbun (2012).

  45. 45.

    Tabuchi (2012a).

  46. 46.

    Hixson (2012).

  47. 47.

    McCurry (2012a).

  48. 48.

    Warnock (2012).

  49. 49.

    Asahi Shimbun (2012).

  50. 50.

    The website of the Nuclear Regulation Authority is available at: http://www.nsr.go.jp/english/.

  51. 51.

    Son and De Wit (2011).

  52. 52.

    China Dialogue (2012).

  53. 53.

    Climate Spectator (2012).

  54. 54.

    Karlenzig (2012).

  55. 55.

    Allan and Reklev (2012).

  56. 56.

    Prime Minister’s Office (2012).

  57. 57.

    Tabuchi (2012a).

  58. 58.

    Yamaguchi (2012).

  59. 59.

    BBC News Asia (2012).

  60. 60.

    Tabuchi (2012b).

  61. 61.

    Nakamoto (2013).

  62. 62.

    Watanabe (2012).

  63. 63.

    2050 Magazine (undated).

  64. 64.

    Yomiuri Shimbun and Daily Yomiuri (2011).

  65. 65.

    Humber and Inajima (2012).

  66. 66.

    Grozdanik (2013).

  67. 67.

    Kurtenbach (2013) and Koh (2012).

  68. 68.

    Yirka (2011).

  69. 69.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011).

  70. 70.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011), p. 40.

  71. 71.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011), p. 11.

  72. 72.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011), p. 12.

  73. 73.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011), pp. 17–18.

  74. 74.

    Reconstruction Design Council (2011), pp. 33, 40.

  75. 75.

    Law No. 76 of 2011.

  76. 76.

    World Bank (2012), p. 19.

  77. 77.

    World Bank (2012), p. 18.

  78. 78.

    Otsuki (2012). The number of Fukushima residents who remained evacuated in other areas of Japan is 60,878 as of 2 August 2012: Kanto district, 26,179; Chubu district, 10,955; Tohoku, 16,088; Kinki district, 2,760; Hokkaido, 1,837; Kyushu, 1,155; Chugoku district, 963; Okinawa, 693 and Shikoku, 248.

  79. 79.

    World Bank (2012), p. 19.

  80. 80.

    Tabuchi (2013).

  81. 81.

    McCurry (2012c).

  82. 82.

    McCurry (2012c).

  83. 83.

    McCurry (2012c).

  84. 84.

    McCurry (2012c).

  85. 85.

    Japan Today (2012).

  86. 86.

    Tabuchi (2013).

  87. 87.

    Sakurai (2013).

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasuko Claremont .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Claremont, Y. (2014). Disaster in Japan: A Case Study. In: Butt, S., Nasu, H., Nottage, L. (eds) Asia-Pacific Disaster Management. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39768-4_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics