Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=raan20

Download by: [Shuhei Kimura] Date: 22 March 2016, At: 07:24

Asian Anthropology

ISSN: 1683-478X (Print) 2168-4227 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/raan20

Lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake:The Public Use of Anthropological Knowledge

Shuhei Kimura

To cite this article: Shuhei Kimura (2012) Lessons from the Great East Japan Earthquake:The Public Use of Anthropological Knowledge, Asian Anthropology, 11:1, 65-74, DOI:10.1080/1683478X.2012.10600856

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1683478X.2012.10600856

Published online: 02 Jan 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 138

View related articles

LessonsfromtheGreatEastJapanEarthquake:ThePublicUseofAnthropologicalKnowledge

ShuheiKIMURA

In this paper I discuss anthropological approaches to natural disaster.1Based on a review of the literature and my experience after the GreatEast Japan Earthquake, hereafter referred to as 3.11, I argue thatresponding (in the emergency period), bridging (in the early rehabilita-tionperiod),andwriting(in the long-termreconstructionperiod)canbeanthropologicalwaysofdealingwithnaturaldisaster.

The World of Mujō

AccordingtoaJapanesesaying,Tensaiwawasuretakoroniyattekuru(天災は忘れた頃にやってくる : “natural disasters strike when we forgetabout them”). Japan faces natural hazards every year, includingtyphoons,earthquakes,floods,andvolcaniceruptions.Thesestrikelocalcommunities, but the authorities can control most of them and they donot result in mass disaster. Seventeen years have passed since the 1995Kobe Earthquake. Even though we heard the news about the IndianOcean Tsunami, the Wenchuan Earthquake, and the Haiti Earthquake,Japanese still tend to forget about natural disasters and have come totreat themassomethingthat isnot“our”problem:disaster issomethingthatstrikes“others”infarawayplaces.

Then, without warning, a tragic disaster struck Japan on March 11,2011. It woke us up and reminded us that the earth does not always

Shuhei Kimura teaches Cultural Anthropology at Fuji Tokoha University,Japan.Hecanbereachedatshuhei.kimura@gmail.com

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

66 ShuheiKIMURA

allow us to stand and walk. Its slight trembles can change our livescompletely. However strong our construction, a small act of the oceancandestroybuildingsandpull themintothewater.Ourearthlylivesarefilled with uncertainty and our control of the socio-natural environmentis imperfect. Itmadeclear thefact thatnaturaldisaster isnotescapable.Thisissomethingthatwemustacceptandthatwehavetolivewith.

3.11madeusrealizemoreabouttheworldthatwearelivinginandhow fragile our lives are.As novelist Murakami Haruki commented onJune9,2011inhisCataloniaPrizespeechinBarcelona:

[W]earelivinginachangingandtransientworldof“mujō.”2Everylifewillchangeandultimatelyfadeaway.Humanbeingshavenopowerinthefaceofthegreaterforcesofnature.(Senrinomichi2011)

The main focus of Murakami’s speech (called “Unrealistic Dreamer”)was the Fukushima nuclear accident, one of the worst consequences ofthe disaster. By placing it in the historical context of the tragic experi-enceofatomicbombs inJapan,heargued thatweshouldstoppursuingprofitandchangeoursociety’sgoals.

In this article I do not want to discuss whether the lesson that hedrew from the accident is correct or not.Rather, as the startingpoint, Iwouldliketocallyourattentiontothewordthatheuses:mujō.Mujō(無常) is a concept originating in Buddhism, referring to the fact thatnothing lasts forever. Everything born into this world changes and willultimatelydisappear.Thereisnothingeternalorimmutableonwhichwecan rely. In the quoted sentence, Murakami uses mujō to describe howtheworldweliveinactuallyis.Inanotherparagraphinthesamespeech,hestatesthatmujō is“oneofthebasicideasofJapaneseculture.”Thus,mujō, which is what, in an ethical sense, the disaster reminded us of,represents both Japanese culture and nature. Consciously or uncon-sciously,Murakami’susageofthiswordindicatesthatdisasterisnotjustanaturaleventbutisalsoacrucialelementofcultureandsociety.

Thisiswhyweanthropologistsstudynaturaldisasters.Theboundarybetweennatureandcultureis,asLevi-Straussinsistedrepeatedly,oneofthe major origins of anthropological inquiries. Disaster, which arisesfromthecrackinthecouplingbetweennatureandculture, issomethingthatanthropologyhastoexplore.

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

LessonsfromtheGreatEastJapanEarthquake 67

The Anthropology of Disaster

Inthehistoryofanthropology,fromBronisławMalinowski(1984[1922])toNancyScheper-Hughes(2005),manyanthropologistshaveexplaineddisaster in their own ways. While early functionalists explained theadaptation of local peoples to their environment and showed hownatural disaster is embedded in their social and ideological systems,symbolicanthropologistshaveexamined themeaningsofdisasterasanexample of disorder or chaos, the opposite of order or structure.Disaster is used as “a natural laboratory” (Oliver-Smith 1996), since itis“goodtothink.”

However,sincethe1980s,disasterhasbecomeanimportantissueofanthropological social critique. Anthropologists of development haveobserved that public policy and development projects on disasters workasanobstacletorealizingagoodlifeinlocalcommunities.Inhiseditedvolume, InterpretationsofCalamity (1983), geographerKennethHewittclaims that mainstream disaster studies or studies of disaster manage-mentaretooformalistictoamelioratelocalsituations.Accordingtohim,therearesomegroupsthataremorevulnerabletodisasterthanothersinevery society.They may be poor.They may be elderly.They may haveless access to political power. They may be pushed to live in a riskyarea.Although field researchershave revealed that disaster proneness issocially conditioned and reproduced through everyday life, as Hewittpoints out, the authorities ignore it and, as a result, they increase thedisparityinvulnerability.

Thus, an understanding of the distribution and construction ofdisaster vulnerability in each social context has become a task in theanthropologyofdisaster.Without separatingdisaster situations from thedailylifeofalocalcommunity,anthropologistshaveattemptedtoethno-graphicallydescribedisasterasasocialprocess.AnthonyOliver-Smith’sThe Martyred City (1986) and Hiromu Shimizu’s Funka no Kodama[Echoes of the eruption] (2003) are among the most important mono-graphs based on long-term observation of the reconstruction processfollowinganaturaldisaster.Oliver-Smithfocusesonconflictsandcoop-eration among people inYungay, a middle-sizedAndean city, after the1970 Peruvian Earthquake. Shimizu brings light to the struggle and therebirth of theAyeta, an indigenous people in the Philippines, after the1991 Pinatubo eruption. Although the two monographs deal with

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

68 ShuheiKIMURA

differentdisasters indifferent areas, theyhave somepoints in common:both of their authors became personally involved in the reconstructionprocess. The studies were completed over the course of more than tenyearsafterthedisasterandtheydescribethelocalpeople’sstruggle,andas a result, criticize the acts of central governments. I call their style“following victims over a long period”—which, in recent years, istypicalforethnographiesoftheanthropologyofdisaster.

Responding to 3.11: Gaps and Lessons

At2:46pmonMarch11,2011, Iwaswalkingalong thebeachofLakeBiwa,inwest-centralHonshu.Iwaspartoftheorganizingcommitteeofathree-daysymposiumbeingheldinahotelfacingthelake.Thesympo-sium was set to start at 3 o’clock. Just as we were entering the venue,wefeltthegroundswingslowly.Weallfeltratherseasick.Shortlyafter,we receivednewsvia the internet of abig earthquake inTohoku, far tothenorth,butwecouldnotbelieve that the swingswe feltwerecausedby that earthquake, since the epicenter was more than 800 kilometersaway. I must confess that my imagination was limited. Without visualinformation I could not even begin to imagine the devastation that hadoccurredinTohoku.Weconcludedthatanearthquakesofarawaywouldnotbeareasontocancelthesymposium,soitbeganonschedule.

In retrospect, I wonder what else I could have done at that point.EvenafterIreturnedfromLakeBiwa,allIcoulddowaswaitandwatchthe news on television. Tense reports and miscellaneous predictions(optimistic and pessimistic, realistic and exaggerated) regarding theTEPCO Fukushima Daiichi power plant were aired continuously. Wewereinthemidstofahighlyunpredictablesituation.

3.11wasadisaster in a strict senseon thebasisof two remarkablepoints.First, ithitamuchbroaderareathana“normal”naturaldisaster.Second,itformedacomplexofnaturalhazardsandman-madeaccidents.Theearthquakeandaftershocksdestroyedbuildingshereand there.Thetsunamicarriedoffnotonlyhousesandofficesbutalsoroads, railways,and other lifelines. Both fuel shortages and radiation leaks preventedcivil aid groups and individual volunteers from entering the area. Thevolatility of governmental policy made both civil servants and thegeneral public in Tohoku confused. To borrow from Oliver-Smith, wemightsay,“Firstcomesearthquake,secondtsunami,thirdmeltdown,andthen…disaster!”

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

LessonsfromtheGreatEastJapanEarthquake 69

I felthelpless.Despite theurgencyof the situation, all I could startwith was collecting donations and talking with other anthropologistsabout“whatwecandonow” (imawatashitachinidekirukoto). I couldnot find anything that an anthropologist could do to make the situationbetter at that point. Remembering the literature related to “followingvictims,” I told myself that I would do something later in the recoveryprocess,butthethoughtstilldidnotgivememuchrelief.

My helplessness was in contrast to the quick action of mycolleagues, the so-called bōsai (disaster prevention and management)experts, agroupof researchers andpractitioners.3In the firstweekafterthe tsunami, they entered the disaster area without hesitation, and theystarted playing important roles there. There was an obvious differencebetweentheiractionsandmine.

What made this difference? First of all, they had practical knowl-edge of and experience in times of disaster. Anthropologists areamateurs, but these experts are familiar with the “rules” of disastermanagement. In Japan, disaster management means, first and foremost,following governmental procedures within the framework of the BasicAct on Disaster Management (Saigai taisaku kihon hō) (1961). Thecentral government, the prefectural governments, and local municipali-ties prepare disaster prevention plans in advance. When a disasterhappens, they set up disaster headquarters (saigai taisaku honbu) andinitiateoperationsaccordingtotheirplan.Theprefecturalgovernmentisthe main actor that controls the situation. It develops a reconstructionplan, negotiates with the central government regarding the amount offinancial or material support, and coordinates the operations of eachmunicipality. Local municipalities take care of victims, distribute aidmaterials, assess thedamageof eachhousehold, and carryout financialsupportprocedurestoputpeople'slivesbackontrackinaccordancewitha unique law, theAct on Support for Reconstructing the Livelihoods ofDisasterVictims(Hisaishaseikatsusaikenshienhō)(1998).

3.11wasnotanaverage-sizednaturaldisasterandthissystemcouldnotfulfillitsfunctionwell,buttherewasnotatotalchaosorvacuum.Ifwewanted todo something in thisperiod,our taskwouldhavebeen torepairthemalfunctionsinthissystem;butinthisinstance,wecouldnotsimplydosomethingofourownvolition.

If we want to answer the question “What can we do now?,” weshould acquire know-how from bōsai people. Interdisciplinary allianceswould be required. Since public organizations are very reluctant to

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

70 ShuheiKIMURA

acceptoutsiders,bōsaiexpertshavealonghistoryofstruggletogetintoemergency areas. By collecting empirical data and elaborating usefultechniques,theycometowintheirtrust.Basedontheiraccumulatedpastexperience,theycananticipatewhatwillgoonandadvisepeoplethere.

Responding to the victims requires us to be prepared in advance.Without knowing what was going on in the devastated area and whattroubles the people there were facing, we could not do anything in thearea.Ontheotherhand,criticismrequiresustokeepadistancespatiallyor psychologically from the subject being criticized. I think that maybebecause we have concentrated on criticizing the malfunctioning of thegovernmentalsystem,wehavefailedtoconsiderourownresponsetotheemergency.

Bridging Visions and Interests: Six Months Later

Almostsixmonthsafterthedisaster,Istartedvisitingatowninthearea,seeking to discover what anthropologists could do to aid in the processof reconstruction. Huge piles of debris remained, but this was slowlychanging.Peoplehadbegunseekingwaysinwhichtomakealivingandto think about their futurewith families and friends.Municipalities haddistributedtemporaryhousinganddevelopedreconstructionplans,whichthevictimsfounddisappointing.

Iobservedthedevelopmentprocessofthemunicipality’sreconstruc-tion plan and attended formal and informal meetings related to thereconstruction of the town. At these meetings I encountered manyvisions and interests: residents of urban areas, residents of rural areas,theelderly,peoplewith infants, fishermen,businessmen,publicofficers,andcitizens.Disastercanexposethehistoricalfaultlinesincommunitiesas well as the traditional practices of reciprocity. It can simultaneouslygive birth to new alliances.As such, it is necessary to clarify them andtocoordinatethedifferentvoices.

Of course, this is never an easy task, but from an anthropologicalperspective, a long-term, on-the-ground commitment seems to be moreeffective at this stage than in the earlier period.As Ulf Hannerz (2010)said, “diversity is our business.” Attending to and recording victims’voices, with consideration given to their diversity, contributes to medi-atingdifferentinterests.Aboveall,weshouldrememberthateveryvoiceand practice is contextualized and that we should be sensitive to thatcontext (cf. Akasaka et al. 2011). Background knowledge of the

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

LessonsfromtheGreatEastJapanEarthquake 71

historical,political,andsocio-culturalconfigurationoftheareaisneces-saryandrequiresalongtimetounderstand.

In addition, a symmetrical approach is needed: the authorities arenot an enemy to criticize but a comrade to create tomorrow together.Observationof theofficers in themunicipality revealed tomehow theyworkedhardandalsohow theywerenotgoodat informing thecitizensoftheirownviewsorincorporatingdifferentviewsintotheplan.Here,Ifound, anthropologists’ efforts to bridge the different actors and build aconsensuscouldbehelpful.4

Writing Anthropologically

Writingremainsawaytoengagewithnaturaldisasteranthropologically.This is a third way to examine the public anthropology of disaster, asBarbaraTedlock(1998)notes:

Imeanthetypeofresearchandwritingthatdirectlyengageswiththecriticalsocial issues of our time….Authors of suchworkspassionately inscribe,translate, and perform their research in order to present it to thegeneralpublic.(198:159)

First, writing is for recording and not forgetting. As Oliver-Smith andShimizu practiced, a long-term commitment to the victims makes itpossible to write ethnography. Ethnography is, as Kim Fortun (2001)argued after the Bhopal accident in India, a way to resist settlement oftheissueandcallsociety’sattentiontoit.

At the same time, tellingstories isdone for survival.Here, Iwouldlike to quote Laura Wagner’s beautiful post on a blog about Haitianhumor after the January 2010 earthquake. She writes that “[p]eople’spersonal earthquake narratives—stories of fear, survival and loss—arelacedwithasurprisingquantityofhumor”(Wagner2011):

Many people, even those who were injured or lost their homes and lovedones, start laughing when they describe seeing their neighbors whohappened to be bathing at 4:53 on January 12…. My teenaged friendJudeline,whoselegwasamputatedbelowthekneebecauseofherinjuries,says wonderingly, laughing, “Frijolito killed so many people!” Frijolito isthenameof the lisping littleboy in theMexican telenovella thateveryonewas following this time last year. It came on at 5 pm, which is why,accordingtoJudeline,somanypeoplewere—unluckily—indoorswhentheearthquakehit.(Wagner2011)

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

72 ShuheiKIMURA

Likewise, although it is said that people inTohoku are shy and quiet, Ihave encountered much laughter and joking there. Weaving jokes andirony into a story is a way to survive, blurring the boundary betweenreality and imagination (cf. Tanuma 2007).AsWagner articulates well,“Joking can be a way to cope. Joking can be the telling of uncomfort-able or hard-to-articulate truths. Joking allows one to assert one’shumanity in what would seem to be impossibly dehumanizing condi-tions”5 (Wagner 2011). Not just to write after the fact, but to exerciseourimaginationtoshakethesystem,tocreateahopefulreality.

To Wagner’s story, I would like to add Murakami’s “UnrealisticDreamer.”InthelastpartofhisspeechinBarcelona,hesaid:

We,professionalauthors,whoareversedintheuseofwords,canpositivelycontribute to this large-scale collectivemission.We should connect newethicsandstandardstonewwords,andcreateandbuildnew,livelystories.Wewillbeable toshare thesestories.Theywillhavearhythm,whichcanencouragepeople, just like the songswhich farmers singwhile plantingseeds.WehadrebuiltJapan,whichhadbeencompletelydestroyedbyWorldWarII.Wehavetoreturntothisstartingpoint.

MarilynStrathernoncewrote:“Iamnotsayingthatanthropologistscanwrite about anything, but rather that the discipline offers resources thatcan be put to use in unexpected situations” (Strathern 2004: 2). Ofcourse, theunexpectedsituationsStrathernpresupposed isnot thesitua-tionweface,butwecanuseherwritingasaresource inanunexpectedway. We are not novelists but anthropologists, professional authors ofethnography. In order to sustain our commitment to the people inTohoku, we should write, shedding light on the details and describingthe “tragic” situation in an anthropological way: not too optimistic yetnottoounrealistic.

Notes 1. PreviousversionsofthispaperwerereadatSEAA2011,Jeonju,Korea,on

August 4, 2011 and EAAA, Osaka, Japan, on September 10, 2011. Myspecial thanks go to Professor John Ertl (Kanazawa University), ProfessorKyung-Koo Han (Seoul National University), Professor Shinji Yamashita(University ofTokyo), and other members and participants of each sessionfortheirinsightfulandencouragingcommentsandsuggestions.

2. Mujō (無常 ) is a concept originating in Buddhism. Murakami’s explana-tion given in the same speech is very close to its dictionary definition,

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

LessonsfromtheGreatEastJapanEarthquake 73

whichisthat“nothinglastsforever.Everythingbornintothisworldchangesand will ultimately disappear. There is nothing eternal or immutable onwhich we can rely” (Senri no michi 2011). Murakami’s speech was deliv-ered in Japanese. Although there is an official translation, it seems tooliteral. To make my points clearer, I quote from another translationappearingonthewebsiteSenrinomichi,ascitedabove.

3. Theyarenot fromonedisciplinebutarea looselyknitgroupofcivilengi-neers,architects,sociologists,socialpsychologists,cityplanners,NGO/NPOworkers,emergencymedicalprofessionals,andsoon.

4. Iwrote the initialversionof thispaper inSeptember2011,andkeep someofitsobservationsinthislaterversion.Sincethereconstructionprocesshasproceededrapidly,myaccountinthissectionmaynotfittheactualsituationatpresent.

5. At the same time, humor can be dangerous. Humor from outside can be atargetofthunderingcriticism.

ReferencesActonSupport forReconstructing theLivelihoodsofDisasterVictims ( 被災者

生活再建支援法 )[Hisaishaseikatsusaikenshienhō].1998.No.66. <http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/H10/H10HO066.html>.Akasaka,Norio,OgumaEiji,andYamauchiAkemi.（赤坂憲雄、小熊英二、山内

明美 ). 2011. Rebirth of Tohoku ( 東北 再生 ) [Tōhoku saisei]. Tokyo: EastPress.

BasicActonDisasterManagement[ 災害対策基本法 ][Saigaitaisakukihonhō].1961.No.223<http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/536/S36HO223.html>.

Fortun, Kim. 2001. Advocacy after Bhopal: Environmentalism, Disaster, NewGlobalOrders.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Hannerz, Ulf. 2010. “Diversity is Our Business.” American Anthropologist112(4):539–551.

Hewitt, Kenneth, ed. 1983. Interpretations of Calamity. Winchester: Allen &Unwin.

Malinowski,Bronisław.1984[1922].Argonautsof theWesternPacific.ProspectHeights,Ill.:WavelandPress.

Oliver-Smith, Anthony. 1986. The Martyred City: Death and Rebirth in theAndes.Albuquerque:UniversityofNewMexicoPress.

———. 1996. “Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters.” AnnualReviewofAnthropology25:303–328.

Scheper-Hughes, Nancy. 2005. “Katrina: The Disaster and Its Doubles.”AnthropologyToday21(6):2–4.

Senrinomichi.2011.<http://www.senrinomichi.com/?p=2541>.ShimizuHiromu( 清水展 ).2003.噴火のこだま：ピナトゥボ・アエタの被災と新

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6

74 ShuheiKIMURA

生をめぐる文化・開発・NGO(Funkanokodama:PinatuboAetanohisaitoshinseiomegurubunkakaihatsuNGO)[Echoesoftheeruption:thesurvivalandrebirthofthePinatuboAyetasandtheirrelationshipwithculture,devel-opmentandNGOs].Fukuoka:KyushuUniversityPress.

Strathern,Marilyn.2004.“TheWholePersonand ItsArtifacts.”AnnualReviewofAnthropology33:1–19.

Tanuma, Sachiko. 2007. “Post-Utopian Irony: Cuban Narratives during the‘SpecialPeriod’Decade.”PoLAR:PoliticalandLegalAnthropologyReview30(1):46–66.

Tedlock,Barbara.1998.“TheObservationofParticipationandtheEmergenceofPublic Ethnography.” In Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry, edited by N.DenzinandY.Lincoln.Pp.151–171.ThousandOaksCA:Sage.

Wagner,Laura.2011.“Something toLaughAbout:AFewThoughtsonHumorin Post-Earthquake Haiti.” <http://savageminds.org/2011/01/13/something-to-laugh-about-a-few-thoughts-on-humor-in-post-earthquake-haiti/>.

Published by The Chinese University Press

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Shuh

ei K

imur

a] a

t 07:

24 2

2 M

arch

201

6