Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks

Norio Okada

doi:10.1007/s13753-018-0204-7

Article Contents

Article Navigation > International Journal of Disaster Risk Science > 2018 > 6(4): 454-463

Norio Okada. Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2018, 6(4): 454-463. doi: 10.1007/s13753-018-0204-7

Citation:

Norio Okada. Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2018, 6(4): 454-463. doi: 10.1007/s13753-018-0204-7

Norio Okada. Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2018, 6(4): 454-463. doi: 10.1007/s13753-018-0204-7

Citation:

PDF

Adaptive Process for SMART Community Governance under Persistent Disruptive Risks

doi: 10.1007/s13753-018-0204-7

Norio Okada

Institute of Disaster Area Revitalization, Regrowth and Governance, Kwansei Gakuin University, Nishinomiya City 662-0891, Japan

Funds:

The author wishes to thank Profs. Ortwin Renn and Ilan Chabay for their valuable comments and advice.

Available Online: 2021-04-26

Abstract

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

FullText(HTML)

References(22)

References

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.

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.

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.

Holling, C.S. (ed.). 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management. Chichester: Wiley.

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

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.

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

Okada, N. 2006a. Perspective on integrated disaster risk management. In Introduction to integrated disaster risk management, ed. Y. Hagihara, N. Okada, and H. Tatano, 9–54. Kyoto: Kyoto University Academic Press (in Japanese).

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

Okada, N. 2010. City and region viewed as Vitae system for integrated disaster risk management. Annuals of Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University, 49B: 131–136.

Okada, N. 2011. 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 32(2): 53–62.

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.

Okada, N. 2016. Who and how triggers and drives resident-led participatory planning and management for better living environment—Japan’s “Machizukuri” challenges. In Indian urbanisation and sustainable development: Spatial perspectives, ed. B.A. Misra, B.N. Singh, H.B. Singh, and K. Lata. Delhi: Kanishka Publishers: 101–115.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

Relative Articles

Supplements(0)

Cited By

Proportional views