Ⅳ

English Summary

Empowerment of Local Communities by
Global Humanitarian Support
Yasuhide Nakamura
Japan Platform / Graduate School of Human Sciences, Osaka University

1. The Great East Japan Earthquake: A natural disaster that struck theheart of an aging society
The Great East Japan Earthquake on March 11, 2011 resulted in colossal damage:nearly 20,000 people dead or missing, and 930,000 houses damaged or destroyed.
Images of 10-meter-plus tsunami waves engulfing towns and farmland circulated
the globe in a matter of minutes, causing enormous shock to the international
community.
We would like to begin by attempting to summarize the characteristicsof the Great East Japan Earthquake. Firstly, it was a natural disaster that directly
hit an aging society: the elderly, or people aged 65 or over, accounted for morethan 30 % of the population in many of the affected municipalities. For example,
affected municipalities in Iwate Prefecture had the following elderly-population
ratios: 34.7% in Kamaishi City, 32.1% in Otsuchi Town, 31.4% in Yamada Town,
30.6% in Ofunato City, and 34.2% in Rikuzentakata City. Such a natural disaster, inthat it affected a region with such an aged population, was unprecedented in theworld. Secondly, a major proportion of the damage was caused by tsunami waves,
while direct damage from earthquake tremors was relatively light. Therefore, likemany of the world’s major tsunami disasters, contour lines more or less divided
areas that received and did not receive damage. In the reconstruction process,communities are expected to have widely different needs depending on the severityof the tsunami damage in their area. Thirdly, it is still difficult, more than one year
on, to project the health effects of the nuclear power plant accident triggered by
the disaster, and the social impact of the resultant long-term evacuations. It is ourduty to the global community to conduct scientific investigations into these mattersover the long term.

2. International solidarity and support
Survivors of the Great East Japan Earthquake received overwhelming support
from overseas. The world had supported Japan in the past, for instance on theoccasions of the Great Kanto Earthquake (1923) and the Great Hanshin Earthquake(1995), however the international support extended to Japan in the wake of theGreat East Japan Earthquake was unprecedented in its scale. Each listed item ofrelief goods or donated funds communicated the good will of the citizens in each of
the numerous assisting countries.
Naturally, the same country can be a provider of international emergency
assistance at times, and a recipient at others. We are immensely grateful for theGreat East Japan Earthquake. At the same time, in the future, Japan’s international
cooperation must be based on the premise that at times of disaster, Japan too
might become an aid recipient. Just as individuals are connected with each other,countries are likewise connected with other countries in this globalized age. The
future demands us to take a hard look at international cooperation and international

Ⅳ English Summary

sympathy and solidarity shown by the international community in the wake of the101

solidarity in the light of reciprocal, global relationships that transcend nationalboundaries. Whether or not Japan duly repays the international support received
on the occasion of the Great East Japan Earthquake depends not on how much it
gives to ODA, but on how it expresses its gratitude for the sympathy and solidarity
shown by others.
By conducting a comprehensive study of the support administered byforeign government agencies, international organizations and international NGOs,
this research survey aims to consider the future shape of international emergency
aid in an age of transnational, global and reciprocal relationships, in order toutilize the lessons learned from the valuable experience of being the recipient ofinternational emergency aid in the future.

3. Activities of Japan Platform
Japan Platform (JPF) decided to dispatch personnel to the affected regions in
the immediate wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake, and conducted support
activities with participating NGOs while also collecting donations and relief goods.
JPF has a system in place that enables it to dispatch NGO personnel within 24
hours of the onset of natural disasters. This is important because rescue within
the first three days can be a crucial for the successful rescue of survivors in thedebris. The tremors and tsunami caused by the Great East Japan Earthquake
disrupted roads, rails and communication traffics over a wide area. Gasoline was inshort supply, access to the affected regions was severely hindered, and a serious
nuclear power plant accident had also occurred. The swiftness of the dispatch

垣根のない連帯と共感

102

Figure 1

of five NGOs on the day of the disaster, and eight NGOs by the following day (ofwhich, 4 NGOs were funded by JPF), under situations fraught with uncertainty anddanger, was due to JPF’s enhanced disaster response capacity, developed throughexperience in humanitarian assistance overseas. JPF calls the first three months(that is, up to June 11, 2011) following the onset of the disaster the “initial response
period,” and the subsequent period the “emergency response period,” and it has
conducted ongoing reconstruction support activities. (Fig. 1)
In providing support on the occasion of the Great East Japan Earthquake,
JPF took the experimental step of opening liaison offices in the affected localities
for the first time in its history. On March 19, 2011, two secretariat personnel
were dispatched to open the Tohoku office in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture.
Subsequently, another base was set up in Tono City, Iwate Prefecture, and staff
members were also dispatched to other strategic points in Miyagi Prefecture,including Kesennuma City (the Council of Social Welfare Volunteer Center),Ishinomaki City (Ishinomaki Disaster Recovery Assistance Council), and Onagawa
Town (the Council of Social Welfare Volunteer Center). Through these bases,
the JPF secretariat provided financial assistance and operational support toparticipating NGOs, conducted matching for corporate support, and managed the
Co-Existence Fund (Fig. 2). JPF also coordinates partnerships between various
support givers, such as governments, the Self-Defense Forces, NPOs/NGOs andprivate sector.
JPF’s activity during its “initial response period” can be highly evaluatedfor its contribution toward saving the lives and living circumstances of the affected
people. This was a result of employing its superior logistics capacity and mobility,

Ⅳ English Summary

Figure 2103built on humanitarian aid experience overseas, to quickly deliver necessary
emergency goods and services at a time when access to the affected regions
was extremely difficult due to road, rail and communication networks being
paralyzed by the unprecedented mega-disaster. JPF’s facilitation and participationin coordination meetings, which functionally linked private support organizations
with their public counterparts, thereby realizing large-scale and comprehensive
distribution of household essentials (“starter packs”) to people moving into
temporary housing, also contributed significantly to kick-starting the process of
rebuilding the lives of the affected people, as well as reconstruction in the affected
regions.
The shortage of basic knowledge on matters, such as the Disaster Relief
Act, was an issue due to the lack of experiences in Japan. As a result, support wasoccasionally based on inefficient cooperation and coordination with governmentalorganizations, which resulted in limited success in saving the lives and living
circumstances of affected people who were not accommodated at evacuation
shelters or purpose-built temporary housing. Although JPF was required torespond to needs that were changing daily, the needs of diverse types of affected
people, and the needs of people vulnerable to disaster, the provision of customized
support, at which private support organizations intrinsically excel, was by nomeans sufficient.
What can be evaluated positively about JPF’s activity during its “emergency
response period” was the fact that JPF was able to provide community support
and livelihood support in a timely manner during the transitional period between
the emergency relief and the reconstruction stages, based on its rich overseas
experience. These forms of support contributed significantly toward the processof helping affected people put their lives back in order, as well as of reconstructionof the affected communities. By uninterruptedly maintaining cooperation andcoordination with governments and other diverse support organizations fromthe “initial response period,” JPF was able to provide support to areas thatgovernment response could not cover, provide functional enhancement support,
and provide suppor t to the wider affected population. As during the “initial
response period,” one issue was the shortage of more customized support, due
to the focus on large-scale goods distribution; this resulted in shortcomings in
responses to areas that fell through the net of government support, namely support
toward affected people remaining in their own homes or living in minashi kasetsu(lit. “deemed temporary housing,” which includes accommodation rented in lieu
of purpose-built temporary housing). Revealed was the need to strengthen thesystem of cooperation and coordination with governmental organizations, disaster
response NGO/NPO networks, the Red Cross, international organizations, overseas
support organizations and the private sector, to enable JPF to better prepare itself
to respond to future major disasters in Japan.
The Great East Japan Earthquake brought JPF its first experience of fullscale response to domestic disaster. While JPF was able to benefit from its richexperience of humanitarian assistance overseas, thereby contributing significantly
to disaster victim support, it was not well versed in legislation pertaining todomestic disasters, resulting in an inability to cope sufficiently with areas calling
垣根のない連帯と共感

104

for more customized support. One of the shortcomings made apparent by theGreat East Japan Earthquake was the lack of coordination a mechanism, both fromoverseas and within Japan. As described above, JPF is duly aware of the need forsupport coordination, which is why it has conducted various activities to that end.
On the whole, though, such activities have been limited in scope, and in practicalterms, JPF could barely apply itself to the coordination of support from overseas,and to the organization of cluster meetings and meetings between various support
organizations.
To learn from the Great East Japan Earthquake and ready ourselves
for future large-scale domestic disasters, we are required first and foremost to
create a mechanism for cooperation and coordination, based on the experienceof providing support on the occasion of the Great East Japan Earthquake. This
may include exchanging memorandums and concluding agreements on majordomestic disaster response with domestic disaster response NGOs, governmentalorganizations, the Japanese Red Cross, and UN organizations (mainly the WFP). It
can also be said that although JPF’s comparative advantage lies in its capacity towork in cooperation with overseas support organizations, this was not sufficiently
achieved on the occasion of the Great East Japan Earthquake. As such, anotherimportant task would be to review, for instance, the inter-agency meetings withoverseas support organizations, conducted in Tokyo shortly after the onset of thedisaster, and work out future policies in partnership with the relevant organizations.

4. Response to the Great East Japan Earthquake from the perspectivesof embassies
The purpose of surveying the views of various embassies in Japan regarding
response to the Great East Japan Earthquake is twofold. One is to identify thediverse range of overseas support systems involved in the response to the Great
East Japan Earthquake, as well as the contents of the material, humanitarian andmonetary support received from overseas. Another is to initiate a study of possible
future modes of international cooperation and disaster relief aid by recording theexperience of having received numerous forms of support from overseas, andexamine the possibility of creating a new disaster relief model based on Japan’s
experience as an industrialized nation that received support from all over the world
following a major natural disaster.
A questionnaire survey was conducted between November 2011 andJanuary 2012. Questionnaires were sent to 116 nations and organizations, of which
39 nations and one organization responded. From January 2012, an interview
survey was conducted alongside the questionnaire survey, so some embassies
were asked the questions contained in the questionnaire during the interviews.
The survey interviews were conducted between January and April 2012.
The interviewees comprised 13 nations and one organization, namely, Afghanistan,
Austria, Canada, India, the Philippines, Finland, Mexico, Oman, Sri Lanka, theTaipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in Japan, Thailand, Turkey, andthe Delegation of the European Union to Japan, and the Republic of Korea. Eachinterview consisted mainly of three parts: firstly, the process leading up to eachnational government commencing administering aid to Japan (exchange between
the home country and the embassy in Japan, and how details such as when, what
and how to assist were decided); secondly, the actual contents of the support; andthirdly, the relationships with the affected communities and affected people fromthe time support was administered up to the present.
When asked about the Great East Japan Earthquake relief aid, many
country in need was none other than Japan.” The remark was not a diplomaticstatement acknowledging Japan’s past assistance to developing countries;
Rather, it was an expression of the frank public view in those countries that theirnation, whether industrialized or developing, had extended support to Japanbecause Japan was the home of people with whom their companies or individual

Ⅳ English Summary

embassies replied that their “citizens showed such generous support because the105citizens had had day-to-day, personal relationships. In other words, the worldwide
support was most certainly the result of relationships fostered over years ofinteraction, activities and assistance by Japanese people in, or with people of,countries throughout the world. The relationships were probably not of the natureof stereotypical foreign diplomacy or international contribution, but friendships
nur tured through working or living together as members of the businesses
community, NPOs/NGOs, volunteer organizations or communities.
The present survey on assistance from overseas revealed the strength oftransnational bonds between civil societies. To turn sympathy into solidarity, andsolidarity into humane support, the present day calls for a support model that is
an embodiment of solidarity put into practice in the global society. Applying thepresent research findings, widely sharing with the global society possible modelsof coexistence in the context of disaster relief aid, and putting such models into
practice, constitute Japan Platform’s duty and chosen course of action.

5. Cooperation across national borders and organizations
The extensiveness and severity of the damage caused by the Great East Japan
Earthquake was unprecedented in Japan’s recorded history. It put those in Japanworking in the area of international disaster relief into the position of “aid recipient
country” for the first time. The Japanese government and NGOs had long taken
an active role in international disaster relief aid to conflict- and disaster-stricken
areas around the world as external providers of humanitarian support. However,the Great East Japan Earthquake presented Japan with the fresh challenge of not
only matching the diverse forms of support coming from numerous support givers
with the affected people, but also doing so within the framework of its own social
system.
As with major disaster situations in any other country, international aid
teams, multiple UN humanitarian organizations, the Red Cross, NGOs/NPOs,
volunteers and various other actors were on the ground following the Great East
Japan Earthquake, providing transnational and trans-organizational assistance.
International support by its very nature varies in terms of standard, language,
content, quality and also provider, which may differ in scale and nature dependingon whether the provider is an international organization, a country, or a privateorganization. This makes it difficult to make good use of incoming support unlessthere is a “system for receiving support,” or in other words, a system for accepting
support and matching or distributing the support appropriately to the localities or
people in need. It was found that the key to achieving effective support lay in how
the external support offers were accepted and then relayed to the affected people
in accordance with the on-the-ground needs.
The importance of transnational and trans-organizational cooperation in
the context of major disaster relief is expected to rise exponentially. This is because
the current age is seeing a rise in worldwide cooperation between citizens, as
individuals are assuming increasingly diverse positions, areas are increasing where
responses by national or municipal governments no longer suffice, cooperationfrom diverse actors is increasingly required, and information can be transmitted
垣根のない連帯と共感

106

around the world in an instant. An analysis of how the support from overseas
was actually accepted revealed that an important key to transnational and transorganizational cooperation lies in the coordination system, which determines how
the external support is accepted and relayed. Crucial to building such a system are
the modeling and institutionalizing of coordination, using international frameworks
such as the cluster approach and the Sphere standard, and by taking into accountthe functions of NGOs/NPOs at times of normalcy. Also necessary are the trainingof the personnel who will be in charge of coordination and the maintenance of
mechanisms for dispatching reinforcement personnel. In addition, an intermediaryspecializing in receiving overseas support would also be necessary, if we areto learn from what made the acceptance of the rescue team from overseas
successful.
In particular, expectation toward the role of NGOs like JPF, which areexperienced in disaster response activities overseas and have close relationships
with governments, is high, as cooperation and coordination with overseasorganizations are increasingly considered necessar y. An autonomous andcontinuous system will be achieved if intermediary organizations like JPF cancoordinate between governments and NGOs/NPOs, or between overseas support
organizations and governments or NGOs, and relay the external support to localorganizations, while also supporting the operation of local organizations. Lastly,
the lessons of cooperation and coordination drawn from the Great East Japan
Earthquake must be shared internationally, so as to apply them to disasters in othercountries or future disasters in Japan that call for overseas support.

6. Was experience of humanitarian support overseas duly applied toearthquake relief in Japan?
The Great Hanshin Earthquake (1995) and the Chuetsu Earthquake (2004) taught
valuable lessons, which were applied to the Great East Japan Earthquake relief inthe forms of swift rescue operations by the Self-Defense Forces and the allocationof temporary housing in a way that did not split up neighborhoods. In the 16
years between the 1995 Hanshin and the 2011 East Japan earthquakes, the world
experienced numerous natural disasters. Counting just the major earthquakes
and tsunamis resulting in 10,000 or more people dead or unaccounted for, suchdisasters were experienced by Turkey, India, Iran, the Indian Ocean littoral,
Pakistan, Sichuan Province in China and Haiti. By learning from successful
examples of support administered on these occasions, and by applying thoselessons, many new guidelines were drafted and put into practice.
The areas struck by these natural disasters, which occurred worldwide,
received help from Japan: the Japanese government dispatched the Japan
Disaster Relief (JDR) international emergency rescue team and the Self-Defense
Forces, while JPF and many other Japanese NGOs conducted emergency support
activities. However, the question remains: have we successfully applied thatknowledge and experience to support activities conducted for the Great East
Japan Earthquake?
Since immediately after the earthquake, support was administered swiftlyto the affected regions and regions adjoining them. Rescue operations by the SelfDefense Forces and Disaster Medical Assistance Team (DMAT) were likewise swift.
Well-organized and uninterrupted support from municipalities across Japan madesignificant contributions.
In the meantime, prompted in large by the failure of humanitarian
support administered during Rwandan Civil War in Central Africa in the 1990s,
organizations, and developed standards and assessment methods for emergency
support. The Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response were laid out by theSphere Project, inaugurated in 1997 by among others the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent, and international NGOs. Also in 1997, not only internationalNGOs but also UN organizations and aid organizations in several countries

Ⅳ English Summary

the international community established various emergency humanitarian aid

107

participated in the establishment of a network organization named the Active
Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action(ALNAP). Full members include international NGOs, the International Red Cross and
Red Crescent, UN organizations such as the WHO and UNICEF, aid organizationsin industrialized countries such as the Japan International Cooperation Agency(JICA), and members of the academic community such as universities and research
institutes. The network aims to approach humanitarian action from both thepractice and research angles, and places emphasis on activity assessment andtraining.
H oweve r, the inte r n ati o n a l s t a n d a r d s u n d e r di s a s te r c o n di ti o n s,established by such international networks, could not be maintained on theoccasion of the Great East Japan Earthquake. Because a disaster forces large
numbers of people to live communally in evacuation centers or shelters or camps, apressing and critical need, perhaps more so than medical need, is to resolve issues
concerning hygiene and the environment, ranging from securing a place to live tosecuring food, water, toilet facilities and managing rubbish disposal. According
to the Sphere Project, toilets are an important issue in maintaining hygiene underdisaster conditions. The Project requires one toilet for every 50 persons in a shelter.
In clinics and hospitals, it requires one toilet per every 20 outpatients, and one toilet
per 10 inpatients. In schools, toilets for girls must be twice the number of those forboys.
In Japan, residents of many of the shelters set up in the wake of the 1995
Hanshin Earthquake still had to put up with odoriferous toilets and insufficient
supply of domestic water two weeks after the quake. Survivors of the Great East
Japan Earthquake were no better off regarding the situation of drinking watersupply and sanitation. Many communities suffered from shortages of drinking anddomestic water supplies for extended periods. Similar shortcomings were observedin post-disaster food security and nutrition. Rice balls or bread constituted themain meals at many of the shelters, even more than two months after the Great
East Japan Earthquake.
International minimum standards already exist and are applied to disasteraffected locations and refugee camps in developing countries. In such countries,
if for instance 500 people are sheltered in a school, support activities start withthe calculation of how many liters of water must then be fetched every day. Of
course, the situation in Japan differs widely from that in developing countries. But
the reality of the situation at the time of the Great East Japan Earthquake was thateverybody had their hands full trying to meet immediate needs, without recourse tominimum standards in disaster response, or rapid assessment.

7. Rebuilding a society to enable coexistence of different generations
Emergency humanitarian support activities, conducted in many parts of the world,
were cooperative endeavors involving the teamwork of outsiders and locals who
would never have met without the tragic disaster. Similarly, the Great East Japan
Earthquake generated many instances of teamwork by local people and outsiders
who hailed not only from all over Japan but from all corners of the earth.
垣根のない連帯と共感

108

JPF has been involved in humanitarian support activities overseas, forinstance in East Timor, which after the conflict became the 21st century’s firstnew sovereign state, and Aceh in Sumatra, Indonesia after it was devastated by
the tsunami. Common to all sites was the presence of children, who were seen as
symbols of reconstruction of society. Communities and governments invariably
placed great expectations on children, who represented hope for the future inaffected localities, and looked warmly upon new births.
Regions affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake are in an advanced
state of population aging. For this very reason, we argue for a post-disasterreconstruction where children native to the affected regions take center stage. We
are apprehensive that overemphasis on disaster-proofing towns and cities, or on
rebuilding industries, might inadvertently make such towns and cities unattractive
to young people and children. We look forward to a reconstruction of a society inwhich generations young and old can coexist.
The Great East Japan Earthquake also reaffirmed the basic principle thatissues of the community should be addressed by the community itself. Not only
do situations vary widely between Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima Prefectures, but
the process of reconstruction will also be vastly different between districts within
the same municipality, depending on the severity of the damage sustained. On theother hand, the Great East Japan Earthquake also demonstrated that methods,
hints and ideas for addressing the issues can be found not only within Japan but
all over the world. We must give back the valuable experience gained overseas,
including experience gained in developing countries, in the form of help toward thereconstruction of the affected communities. We must also apply the experience
gained from the Great East Japan Earthquake, including both successes andfailures, to the practice of international cooperation.
It is hoped that the valuable experience of receiving assistance from theworld in the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake will lead to the establishmentof a new, mutual mode of international cooperation.

Ⅳ English Summary109

垣根のない連帯と共感
東日本大震災における海外からの支援に関する調査事業報告書
2012 年 6 月発行
編集

中村安秀、石井正子

発行

特定非営利活動法人ジャパン・プラットフォーム
東日本大震災における海外からの支援に関する調査事業〒 100-0004 東京都千代田区大手町 1-6-1 大手町ビル 266 区

Tel: 03-5223-8891 Fax: 03-3240-6090
Email: info@japanplatform.org
制作 / 印刷

ブックポケット

Solidarity and Sympathy across the Borders:
A Comprehensive Survey on Support from Overseas in
Response to the Great Japan Earthquake
June 2012
Edited by: Yasuhide Nakamura, Masako Ishii
Issued by: Japan Platform: A Comprehensive Survey on Support
from Overseas in Response to the Great Japan Earthquake
Otemachi Bldg, 266, 1-6-1 Otemachi,Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
100-0004 JAPAN
Tel: 03-5223-8891 Fax: 03-3240-6090
Email: info@japanplatform.org
Printed and Designed by: bookpocket Ltd.