Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks

Abstract

This article addresses the increasing need for participatory approaches to disaster reduction at the community level. Based on the author’s 30-year engagement in the mountainous community Chizu Town, Tottori Prefecture, Japan, a unique participatory approach called “Zero-to-One Movement” has been strategically studied. The study areas are found to have adaptively increased their coping capacity. Their unique participatory process is shown to be an adaptive process for SMART community governance under persistent disruptive risks—“S” represents small-sized and survivability-minded, “M” modest-scale and multiple-stakeholder involved, “A” anticipatory and adaptive, “R” risk-concerned and responsive, and “T” is transformative. Finally, the Case Station-Field Campus scheme is proposed to serve as a platform for studying the adaptive processes over a long period of time.

Keywords

Case Station-Field Campus scheme / Japan / Persistent disruptive risks / SMART governance / Zero-to-One movement

References

[1] Chabay I. 2017. Overview of KLASICA: An IASS international research alliance. Presentation at the IASS-IDRiM Workshop on Risk Governance for Natural Disasters—Extending Integrated Disaster Risk Management to Sustainable Communities, 29 August 2017, Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS), Potsdam, Germany. https://www.iass-potsdam.de/en/research/knowledge-learning-and-societal-change-alliance-klasica. Accessed 4 Sep 2018.

[2] Christensen, C.M., Raynor, M.E., McDonald, R. 2015. What is disruptive innovation? Harvard Business Review, December 2015 Issue. https://hbr.org/2015/12/what-is-disruptive-innovation. Accessed 17 Nov 2018.

[3] Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T., Gunderson, L., Holling, C.S., Walker, B., Bengtsson, J., Berkes, F., et al. 2012. Resilience and sustainable development: Building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Stockholm, Sweden: Environmental Advisory Council, Ministry of the Environment. http://era-mx.org/biblio/resilience-sd.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2018.

[4] Holling CS. Adaptive environmental assessment and management, 1978, Chichester: Wiley

[5] IASS (Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies). 2018. Website. https://www.cigionline.org/partner/institute-advanced-sustainability-studies-iass. Accessed 22 Nov 2018.

[6] IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2012. Managing the risks of extreme events and disasters to advance climate change adaptation—Special report of IPCC. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srex/SREX_Full_Report.pdf. Accessed 17 Nov 2018.

[7] Kawahara T, Sugiman T. Revitalization of a rural depopulated community by introducing participatory democracy system into each smallest unit of community. The Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2003, 42(2): 101-119

[8] Okada N. Hagihara Y, Okada N, Tatano H. Perspective on integrated disaster risk management. Introduction to integrated disaster risk management, 2006, Kyoto: Kyoto University Academic Press 9-54 (in Japanese)

[9] Okada N. Urban diagnosis and integrated disaster risk management. Journal of Natural Disaster Science, 2006, 26(2): 49-54.

[10] Okada N. City and region viewed as Vitae system for integrated disaster risk management. Annuals of Disaster Prevention Research Institute, 2010, 49: 131-136.

[11] Okada N. A scientific challenge for society under sustainability risks by addressing coping capacity, collective knowledge and action to change: A Vitae System perspective. Journal of Natural Disaster Science, 2011, 32(2): 53-62

[12] Okada, N. 2012. Lessons learned from recent disasters in Japan, and implications for ASEAN countries. Keynote presentation at the ASEAN-Japan meeting, 26 June 2012, Naha, Japan.

[13] Okada N. Misra BA, Singh BN, Singh HB, Lata K. Who and how triggers and drives resident-led participatory planning and management for better living environment—Japan’s “Machizukuri” challenges. Indian urbanisation and sustainable development: Spatial perspectives, 2016, Delhi: Kanishka Publishers 101-115.

[14] Okada, N. 2017. Beyond disaster risk reduction: Smart governance to survive Persistent Disruptive Stressors (PDS). Final Seminar at the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS), 16 January 2017, Potsdam, Germany.

[15] Okada, N. 2018. Research networking by Field-Campus and Case-Stations (CASiFiCA) for “Build Back Better.” In Presentation at the Asian Science and Technology Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction, 17–18 April 2018, Beijing, China.

[16] Okada N, Sugiman T. A research perspective of rural declining towards the development of community planning research. Journal of Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 1996, 562(IV-35): 15-25 (in Japanese)

[17] Okada, N., and Tatano, H. 2008. Case Station-Field Campus (CASiFiCA): Globally-networked, field-based research and education challenges for disaster reduction. Presentation at the International Disaster and Risk (IDRC) DAVOS Conference 2008, 25–29 August, Davos, Switzerland. https://idrc.info/fileadmin/user_upload/idrc/former_conferences/idrc2008/presentations/Program_forWebsite_V7.pdf#search = ’Davos+conference+Case+StationField+Campus+%28CASiFiCA%29+%3A+Globallynetworked%2C+Fieldbased+Research+and+Education+Challenges+for+Disaster+Reduction. Accessed 20 Jul 2018.

[18] Okada N, Fang L, Kilgour M. Community-based decision making in Japan. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2013, 22(1): 45-52

[19] Okada N, Na J, Fang L, Teratani A. The Yonmenkaigi System Method: An implementation-oriented group decision support approach. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2013, 22(1): 53-67

[20] Sugiman, T. 2001. 17-year history of revitalization movement in Chizu. Proceedings of Kasology Trilateral 1st Conference in Chizu, Japan, 1–10.

[21] Sugiman T. Theory in the context of collaborative inquiry. Theory and Psychology, 2006, 16(3): 311-325

[22] The Asahi Shinbun. 2018. Death toll hits 81 as western Japan braces for more heavy rain. 8 July 2018. http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/AJ201807080023.html. Accessed 15 Aug 2018.