Reading Material

Advocacy to local government:
Experience of KOBE after the great earthquake, relation
between NPO/NGO and local administration

Roles of NPOs in Community Development
A Case of the Post-Earthquake NPO:
“Machi-Communication” in Mikura, Nagata Ward, Kobe CityCONTENTS
Chapter 1

Summary2

Chapter 2

Background of the case4

Chapter 3

Description of the area

6

Chapter 4

Timeline

8

Chapter 5

Actors and stakeholders

15

Chapter 6

Lessons Learned18Roles of NPOs in Community Development
A Case of the Post-Earthquake NPO: “Machi-Communication” in Mikura,
Nagata Ward, Kobe City

Chapter 1

Case Study Summary

At 05:46 on January 17, 1995 a massive earthquake of magnitude 7.2 struck in south
Hyogo Prefecture. Because the earthquake occurred in the densely populated
Kobe-Hanshin area, the cost in human lives and property was extremely serious.

Morethan 6,400 people died, 34,600 were injured, and 250,000 houses were halfway orcompletely destroyed.

Basic lifeline infrastructure, including electricity, water, gas,railways, highways, etc., was destroyed.
and community centers nearby.

Millions of victims were evacuated to schools

It was all too apparent that the government could notmeet all the immediate and various needs of the victims.
Such a situation evoked strong response among the Japanese.

Just after theearthquake, many Japanese, including those who had never before participated in thevolunteer projects, headed to the disaster-struck area and supported the victims invarious ways.

This surge of groups of volunteers and their activities after theearthquake led the government to enact the so-called “NPO (Non Profit Organization)
Law” which made acquiring legal status easier for volunteer groups.
For these 10 post-quake years, quite a number of NPOs have been established in Kobe.
Many of them still continue to have various activities such as community development,
welfare, foreign residents support, community business, etc. In spite of a difference inissues and approaches, major NPOs in Kobe form a loose network and examine together
their roles they played in the process of earthquake rehabilitation, and the role they canplay in the future.

Their examination and discussion was once compiled into a book

“Action Plan Kobe after the earthquake – Creating Civil Society” in 2001.
“Machi(town)-Communication” (hereafter Machi-Commi) is one of such NPOs in Kobe.
Machi-Commi was established by young volunteers and an owner of a small company in
Mikura, Nagata Ward, an earthquake decimated area in Kobe City.

For these 10 years,

Machi-Commi has focused its activities on community development in Mikura, based on
its belief that “reconstruction cannot be achieved without revitalizing communities”.

2

The group has organized various unique activities and projects to revitalize thecommunity by promoting collaboration between residents and outsiders as well as
among residents.
By examining the case of Machi-Commi, this reading material aims to explore thepossible role and attitudes of outsiders, especially NPOs, in community reconstruction;
how NPOs can build trust with local residents, how they can facilitate the development
process of the community, and what the strength and limitation of NPOs in community
development are.

3

Chapter 2

Background of the case1) Massive earthquake destroys infrastructure and community
As mentioned in the summary, at 05:46 on January 17, 1995, a strong earthquake ofmagnitude around 7.2 struck in the greater Hanshin metropolitan area.

The epicenterof the earthquake was on northern end of Awaji Island, just 20 km away from thecosmopolitan city of Kobe.

Toppled stone lanterns and bookcases in homes as far as

100 km from the epicenter were reported.
Because the earthquake struck in the densely populated area, more than 6,400 people
died, 34,600 were injured, 7,000 houses were burned down, and more than 250,000
houses were partially or completely destroyed.

Basic lifeline infrastructure, including

electricity, water, gas, railways, highways, etc., was destroyed.

Millions of victims

were evacuated to schools and community centers nearby.

Japan

Hyogo Prefecture

Kobe City●
Hanshin Area

A) 10:00 a.m., 17 January, 2005

Awaji Island

Nagata Ward

B) Emergency shelter (School gymnasium)42)

Surge of voluntary activity occurs ----- NPOs created for victim support

The government was apparently unable to efficiently meet the immediate and various
needs o the victims.

Provoked by the catastrophic situation daily broadcast by

mass-media, enormous number of NGOs and volunteers from all over the country,
including ordinary citizens who had never before participated in such voluntary works,
came to disaster-stricken area to help.
This surge of volunteer-ism led the government to establish the “NPO (Non-Profit
Organization) Law” in 1995, which made acquiring legal status easier for volunteer
groups.
3) Focus shifts from emergency relief to community development
NGO/NPOs as well as individuals and groups of volunteers have organized various
activities concurrent with the changing needs of victims during the reconstruction
process.

During the first stage, their main focus was emergency relief. Later thisoutside support gradually shifted its focus to support for the recovery process at
temporary housings, support for the rehabilitation process by at new housings, and to
the facilitation for community development. After the urgent needs for emergency
relief had been somewhat satisfied, the majority of volunteers returned to their homes
all over Japan.

Yet there were some who continued to stay in Kobe in order to organize

reconstruction activities as well as community rehabilitation activities after thedisaster.
Machi-Commi is one such volunteer group/NPO that has continued their activities since
its establishment just after the earthquake to the present time.

One characteristic of

Machi-Commi is its focus on community development in the Mikura area(block 5, 6, and
7 of Mikura), Nagara Ward, Kobe City, based on their belief that “reconstruction cannot
be achieved without revitalizing a community”.

Another is how Machi-Commi has

successfully promoted collaboration between young volunteers from outside thecommunity and the senior citizens of Mikura.

5

Chapter 3

Description of the area

Before the Earthquake
As mentioned above, Mikura area is a part of Nagara Ward, Kobe City, Hyogo
Prefecture.

Prior to the earthquake, Mikura was typical old sections in Kobe, withmany small wooden houses closely packed along narrow streets no more than two
meters in width.

The total area of Mikura is about 6 ha, and this was densely

populated with around 300 households.

In addition to residences, were many small

factories of the rubber, iron, or steel industries; restaurants and shops used by theworkers of the area, and other buildings.

These were interspersed in a fashon thatallowed people to work in close proximity to their home, and to maintain relatively closesocial ties with each other as they frequently passed one another on the street.
This is the very physical arrangement that encouraged fires to ignite and spread
immediately after the earthquake, burning 80 % of the area to the ground.

70 % of thehouseholds lost their houses and workplaces the very day of the earthquake.
Twenty-seven fatalities were reported in this area alone.

Nagata Ward and its

neighboring Hyogo Ward are the two most seriously quake-damaged areas.

住宅

Houses

工場

Factories

店鋪

3

Shops

飲食店

空家

Restaurants

極東ビル
空家

駐車場
Parking

3
3

3

3

3
3

御蔵公園

3
3
5
空家

3 3
B-O-6-36

3
3
3
4

ガレージ

3

3

3
3
3

C) Mikura before the earthquake3

Map of Mikura before the earthquake

6

After the Earthquake
On March 17, 1995, two months after the earthquake, Kobe city government announced
a new urban re-zoning and reconstruction project for the area in order to make it moredisaster-resistant.
residents.

The landscape of Mikura is no longer recognizable to its former

The government has replaced the narrow streets and small woodenbuildings with wide thoroughfares, to enable fire engines easy access, and high-rise
concrete aprartments. The population of Mikura is now 2/3 of what it was before theearthquake and half of these residents have come to Mikura from other areas. As aresult, ten years after the disaster, only 1/3 of the original residents of Mikura havebeen able to return to their town.

D) Mikura after the earthquake
Houses
Factories
Shops & restaurants
Public facilities
Parks

Map of Mikura after the earthquake and re-zoning project7

Chapter 4

Timeline of the casei) The beginning :an accidental encounter between young volunteers and a local

resident
Machi-Commi was founded through a chance encounter between young volunteers andan owner of a small company in Mikura.

Mr. Ono, a volunteer from Tokyo, is one of the

key-persons who led the establishment of Machi-Commi. Just after the earthquake,
Mr. Ono came to Nagata Ward, together with other volunteers from a NGO based inTokyo.

They brought a printing machine with them, facilitated by the idea of thepresident of a printing company where Mr. Ono was on staff, “Let’s take a printing
machine to Kobe and issue a daily newspaper for the victims.” Upon their arrival, Mr.
Ono and his friends began to issue “Daily Needs”, which provided relief distribution
schedules, location of the public baths, etc., and distributed to the houses in Nagata
Ward.
Mr. Tanaka, who was a local firm owner, received this “Daily Needs” at his warehouse,
one of the few structures that remained standing.

One rainy day, he happened to visit

this newsletter’s production “headquarters” where Mr. Ono and other young volunteers
were working in a corner of a public park.

According to Mr. Tanaka, this accidental

visit turned out to be an important turning point in his life.

Later, he recollected, in aninterview in one of the national newspapers, how moved he was by the sincerity of theyoung volunteers.
“I thought that they had something that I didn’t have.

Before I met them, I

believed that what is important in life is to work hard and earn money. But afterI met them, I deeply felt that I had been mistaken.

It is so empty if a person

works only for money. Meeting them changed my life.”
Triggered by this encounter, Mr. Tanaka proposed the volunteers relocate to the prefabbuilding that he had built at his parking lot.

More than 7 volunteer groups/NGOs

gathered at his building.
ii) Initial stage issues : How to bring the original residents back to the community
By the summer of 1995, most of the victims who had lost their houses had been moved
from relief shelters to temporary housing complexes built in the suburbs.

8The

majority of volunteers had also shifted their focus to issues at temporary housing
complexes. However, Mr. Tanaka, Mr. Ono and his friends decided to continue to workin Mikura where the majority of people had been evacuated to other areas.

Theyestablished “Machi-Commi”, based on their belief that “reconstruction cannot be
achieved without revitalizing a community”.

The first major issue they wished to

revolve at the initial stage was “how to bring former residents back to the community.”
By establishing a system to insure full-time staff remained in the community,“Machi-Commi” also played the role of secretariat for the “Mikura Area Community
Development Association” (hereafter referred to as the Association).
To provide an opportunity for residents who had evacuated to temporary housing
complexes in other areas to return to the community and meet again even for a shorttime, Machi-Commi, hand in hand with the Association, facilitated and coordinatedvarious events such as Bon Dance Festivals, rice cake pounding and memorial services
in Mikura.

Through helping out with these events and working hard with theresidents, Machi-Commi gradually built close relations and trust with the residents.

E)

Bon Dance Festival (Aug. 1996)

F) Mikura 5 : Residents and supporters

Joint housing “Mikura 5” construction project
However, the Association and Machi-Commi soon learned the difficulty of residents who
once moved out of the area to return.

In order to solve this issue, they started a joint

housing (apartment house) project with several households. The Association asked anarchitect to propose a joint housing plan and held several study meetings.
Machi-Commi played the role of mediator and facilitated the discussions between
architectural and legal specialists and the Association.

In cooperation with auniversity laboratory, Machi-Commi also conducted a survey, interviewing around 50
households to explore the practicality of realizing the joint housing project.

9

They alsodealt with the difficult task of coordinating and readjusting the residents’ rights to land
and housing.
Although the project was gradually scaled down, 9 households finally agreed toparticipate in the project and the construction of the “Mikura 5” joint housing complex
began in January 1999.

“Mikura 5” has since won acclaim in some circles as the only

construction in Kobe to be coordinated and completed by a volunteer group.
Machi-Commi played the role of coordinator, facilitating the construction process bycoordinating tenant, planners and construction company.

It also facilitated therehabilitation process of the people to daily life, such as removal from the temporary
housing, since many of the tenants were elderly people.
Another efforts to bringing the residents back
Besides the joint housing project, Machi-Commi also tried to distribute information on
the newly built government housing in Mikura to the dispersed residents in order forthem to be aware they could come back to the area.

In 1999, government housing withthe capacity to accommodate 95 households were finally completed in the Mikura area.
Although pre-quake Mikura residents were given priority in becoming tenants in thisapartment, few of them knew about this government housing.

This was because 4

years had lapsed the earthquake and completion of the housing.

Machi-Commitherefore investigated contact addresses and helped them to move into the government
housing in their original community. Although both the Association and Machi-Commi
did their best to identify, locate and enable the former residents of Mikura to relocate,
only 23 households could return to Mikura area government housing
Now, 10 years since the earthquake, Mikura remains at 2/3 of its pre-quake populationand half of this number are newcomers to the area.

In other words, only 1/3 of theoriginal residents were able to return to their community.
iii) Efforts to strengthen the community ties
Buildings and roads can be completed by the government’s urban re-zoning project.
However, the residents of Mikura area often say they feel, “roads and building are next
to useless without a close-knit community who know and look out for each other.”
As detailed above, the pre- and post-quake Mikura are neither physically nor socially10

recognizable as the same place.

A cozy old town with small wooden houses and narrow

streets has become a modern town with high-rise concrete apartment buildings andbroad streets.

Half of the current residents are newcomers.

To accommodate the need for strengthen the social ties, Machi-Commi has organizedvarious activities.
Support for local groups
One such efforts is a technical assistance to local groups.

After the earthquake,housewives remaining in Mikura formed a group known as “Our Town Society “. The
group held various kinds of events residents could easily join. Led by the Our Town
Society, residents of Mikura area started to reaffirm their connections with each other,based on the lesson that they learned through the earthquake; “When emergency
strikes, we rely on neighbors.”
The Our Town Society is merely a voluntary group with no legal status as opposed to theCommunity Development Association, which has a certain legal status stipulated by thecity ordinance. Thus, Machi-Commi backed the group by helping to apply for subsidies
to raise funds and assist with its management.
Establishment of a community space called “Plaza 5”
Day to day community development can be more easily facilitated if there is a place
residents can casually drop in. With this in mind, Machi-Commi set up a community
space called “Plaza 5” in April 2000, on the 1st floor of the joint housing complex“Mikura 5”.

Through Plaza 5, Machi-Commi was able to establish a system thatenabled local residents to take care of the elderly and children in the community bythemselves.

Various opportunities for exchange such as tea parties, luncheons,dinners, and computer classes were planned and held with the support of the volunteers
from outside the community.

At computer clubs organized by the graduates of thecomputer classes, each member became an instructor and shared their knowledge andskills with others.

Plaza 5 has become a place where residents and volunteers cancommunicate and start something together to make the town more attractive.
In addition to the activities at Plaza 5, Machi-Commi has coordinated and facilitatedactivities in which residents and volunteers can work together in a physical sense, suchas planting flowerbeds at parks and erecting a monument for the deceased.

11

All ofthese activities were useful to strengthen the formerly disaster-destroyed community.

G) Activities at Plaza 5H) Activities with childrenI) Erecting a monument

J) Planting flower beds in a park

“Community Hall” construction project
The construction of a community hall is an epoch-making activity for the Mikura area.
Again, Machi-Commi played an important role in coordinating and facilitating thisprocess.

Discussions leading up to the construction of a community hall started

around October 2001.

The plan was discussed repeatedly, and community halls inother areas were visited.

After the implementation of the urban re-zoning project, theonce old town of Mikura with wooden houses and close community ties had changed intoa hurriedly constructed new town with many prefabricated houses and modern
apartments.

Some residents said “The town looks nicer now but has lost its warmth”,“I miss daily communications with neighbors which were around every corner.”
After a series of discussion, the residents of Mikura area decided to move an old

12traditional wooden house from the countryside of Hyogo Prefecture to Mikura andreassemble it into their community hall.

It was expected that this construction project

would result in a place where people could gather, recollecting and enjoying a sense ofold days in wooden houses.
There was another expectation in this project.

Today, most people consider that ahouse is something to be bought. Yet, not so long ago, it was common that a house wasbuilt together by local people by working together.

Through the communal

construction process, people come to appreciate other people, and learn that there arethings that cannot be bought with money.

The Community Hall construction project

was expected to reproduce the interpersonal connections of communal labor inquake-ravaged Mikura area.
In the summer of 2002, a traditional old house in Yasuki Village, which was scheduled
to be scrapped, was dismantled.

Student volunteers studying architecture stayed

together at a gymnasium in the village for two weeks to engage in this work.
Mikura area supported them by preparing meals.

Women ofThe village residents, who had

watched the work suspiciously at the beginning, gradually started to empathize withthe students’ efforts and even to lend their support.

The residents of Mikura andvolunteers worked together in carrying the dismantled materials and preparing
additional materials by cutting down wood and bamboo.

K) Working together at Yasuki Village
The reassembly work in Mikura area started in July of 2003.

Though the framework

was put together by the construction company, most of the other works were done by13

local residents and volunteers under the guidance of carpenters and plasterers.
Elementary school students and elderly people in their 80’s also participated in suchlight works as bamboo latticework and mud wall coating.
Because everyone worked together, the total construction cost was scaled down to 2/3 ofthe original estimate. A part of the cost was borne by the government in the form ofcommunity hall construction subsidies, yet the rest of the funds were raised throughcollecting donations from concerned citizens throughout the country as well as theresidents in the Mikura area.

As the government subsidy was available only after thebuilding was completed, necessary operational cost for the moment was collected
through the donations from the residents.
In total, more than 2,000 people were involved in the project.

Everyone contributed

labor, time, skills, and networks according to his/her ability.

Those who were

physically strong joined in the construction work, those who were good at cooking
prepared meals for the workers and volunteers, and those who could not join in during
the daytime cooperated by raising funds.
Through the process to work together toward a common goal, everyone felt something
very humane, which is difficult to experience at ordinary times.

Some commented,“This building has already become a community hall, where people gather andcooperate, since the construction stage.”

In January 2004, nine years after theearthquake, the Mikura 5-7 Community Hall was completed as a symbol of thecommunity.

L) Construction process (above)M) Mikura Community Hall (right)

14

Chapter 5

Actors and stakeholders

There are several organizations / groups that are active and important in promoting
community development in Mikura area.
1) Mikura Community Development Association
The Mikura Community Development Associtation (hereafter Association) is anassociation of all the residents of Mikura area (block 5, 6, and 7), organized for the
purpose of implementing the city government’s re-zoning project.

According to the

Kobe City Ordinance on Community Development, each community that was
designated as an area for city re-zoning is obliged to organize a “Community
Development Association”. Although it is called a “Community Development
Association”, the expected role of the Association was to discuss and implement the city
government re-zoning project, whose main purpose is to develop (broaden) roads/streets,parks, and other infrastructure in the area.
The city government designated Mikura area as re-zoning area on 17 March 1995, justafter the earthquake. The Association was organized to urge consensus among theresidents and implement the re-zoning project.

In the case of the Mikura area

association, however, the Association stepped beyond this role and hand in hand with
Machi-Commi an has been active in organizing various activities to promote community
development, providing support to the residents in rehabilitation and housing, holding
workshops to plan community parks and streets, constructing the community hall, andmuch more.
¾

Established : 23 April ,1995¾

Major activities: Construction of the Community Hall, Community Park, etc.
publishing newsletters¾

Chairperson : Mr. Yasuzo Tanaka¾

Members: Residents of Mikura (block 5, 6, and 7), owners of land and houses in

Mikura2) Mikura Town Committee (Jichikai)
A Town Committee (Jichikai) is an organization of the residents living in a certain
locality (block, ward, etc.).

It has a long history in Japan, and has played an importantrole especially in linking the community and the government.

15

Although the name isdifferent from place to place and from time to time (Jichikai, Chonaikai, or sometimes

Burakukai), most communities in Japan have Town Committees.
According to Torigoe1, Town Committee has the following 5 characteristics in common;
1) a household (not an individual) as a member, 2) only one Committee in one certain
geographical area (no overlapping), 3) every household in the area is a member, 4) its
activities cover all aspects of everyday life, and 5) it has a strong link with the local
government.
In Mikura, Town Committee existed long before the earthquake.
inactive because of the earthquake.

Yet it became

In April 2002, the Mikura Town Committee

resumed its activities under the leadership of the new president.
¾

Major activities: Maintenance of the community park, management of community
hall, trainings for disaster prevention, etc.

¾

Chairperson : Mr. Hiroyuki Shibata¾

Members: All the residents of Mikura (block 5, 6, and 7)3) Machi-Communication
Machi-Communication is an NPO organized by volunteers and concerned local
residents for the purpose of supporting and promoting community reconstruction anddevelopment in Mikura area.
¾

Established : April 1996¾

Major activities: Support to Mikura Community Development Association (assecretariat), coordination of joint housing construction, planning of the various
events and activities for community development, etc.

¾ Chairperson : Mr. Akira Miyasada¾ Staffs: Volunteers (students etc.) mainly from outside

4) Plaza 5
In order to further promote community activities in Mikura, a community space called
Plaza 5 was established at the 1st floor of Mikura 5.

Plaza 5 is managed by a steeringcommittee consist of concerned residents, Machi-Commi, and professionals of social
welfare and community development.
1

Torigoe, Hiroyuki. “Chiiki Jichikai no Kenkyu (Study on Town Committee)” Minerva, 1994, p.9

16

¾

Established : April 2000¾

Major activities: Tea parties among the elderly, welfare services for the elderly,classes on computer use, etc.

¾

Chairperson : Mr. Ueda¾

Staffs: Volunteers (mainly local residents)

5) Group “Moe”
Group “Moe” is a group of local residents, mostly the elderly, in and around Mikura area
to create a good relationship and networks in the community to enjoy life together andsupport each other.
¾

Established : April 2001¾

Major activities : Handicraft making, mini-golf, etc.

¾

Chairperson : Ms. Chieko Takeuchi¾

Members: Residents of Mikura area, Kita-machi, Kagura, and Hosoda

As mentioned above, each group has different characteristics.

Community

development in Mikura has been, and is being, facilitated through good combinations ofconcerned persons and collaboration among such people as: local residents andoutsiders, the youth and the elders, and men and women.
.

17Chapter 6

Lessons learned

The experiences of Mikura have given us several precious lessons to explore as regards
community development, and particularly the role of outsiders in community
development.
¾

One of the lessons is that community development cannot be achieved only throughphysical infrastructure development.

Although the major task of the Community

Development Association established in stipulation with a city ordinance was theimplementation of the urban re-zoning project, the Association in Mikura focusedon the social aspect of development based on the belief “reconstruction cannot be
achieved without revitalizing communities.” It has organized various activities tostrengthen community ties in good collaboration with Machi-Commi..
¾

In facilitating activities for revitalizing community, Machi-Commi as an outsider
for the community plays multiple roles.

Sometimes it plays the role of translator

or mediator for the residents and linked them with outside resources, including
professionals, young new volunteers, the city government, etc.

Sometime it

becomes a consultant for the residents to conduct surveys on the community, or asecretariat to document and manage administrative works.

It also becomes a

mirror for the residents to reflect on themselves, as Mr. Tanaka reflected his life
when he met the volunteers.

Mr. Miyasada, a chairperson of Machi-Commi,

mentions in his essay, outsiders become good mediators among residents, as they
are free from the interest of local politics.
¾

Although Machi-Commi is one of the very important actors in Mikura, community
development cannot occur without active participation of the residents as the main
actor of development.

One of the key factors for success in Mikura is that

Machi-Commi could build good relationship and collaboration with various localorganizations and groups with different characters, including the Community
Development Association, Town Committees, Our Town Society, Group “Moe”.
Timing-wise, the initial stage is seen to have been a good entry point for
Machi-Commi to become a secretariat for the Community Development Association.
According to Mr. Miyasada, their daily presence in the community itself is also
important to build trust with the residents.

As a chairperson who works daily inthe secretariat in Mikura, he says that he sometimes helps the residents in fixing

18electricity changing light bulbs, if he is asked, as he is one of the few young men
staying in the community during the daytime.

According to him, such casualcommunication with the residents is sometimes more important than organizing
events or seminars to build good relationship with the residents.
There may be more lessons that we can learn from the experience of the Mikura area.
In the context of your country, what kind of lessons do you extract?

About contacting to Machi-communication
Mikuradori 5-chome, Nagata ward, Kobe City 653-0014
Tel 078-578-1100
Fax 078-576-7961
Email：m-comi@bj.wakwak.com
HP:http://park15.wakwak.com/~m-comi19

【About contacting to “ Machi-communication ”】

Email：m-comi@bj.wakwak.com
Address：Mikuradori 5-chome 5-5, Nagata ward,
Kobe City, Hyogo Prefecture 653-0014, JAPAN
Tel：078-578-1100
Fax：078-576-7961
WEB site：http://park15.wakwak.com/~m-comi【Reference】
English(video and report and info)
http://machicomi.blog42.fc2.com/blog-entry-215.html
Chinese(video and report and info)
http://machicomi.blog42.fc2.com/blog-entry-883.html
Korean(report and info)
http://machicomi.blog42.fc2.com/blog-entry-850.html
Spanish(report and info)
http://machicomi.blog42.fc2.com/blog-entry-884.html
French(video)Please Send Email to our office.