Chapter 50
Communication of Disaster Science
Field of expertise: Social Science, Public Relations, Science Communication

Natsuko Chubachi
Summary
In the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake, existing science communication was called intoquestion. Since then, more efforts have been made to share disaster science with society,including a three-year project in which researchers collaborate with the media to convey theirfindings to society. It is not easy for experts and citizens to reach a mutual understanding ofdisaster science. Today, however, all members of society are stakeholders in science, and it isimportant also for non-specialists to take an interest in science and actively participate in science
communication.
Keywords: disaster science, science communication, collaboration between researchers and themedia

Introduction
Recently, the necessity to share science with the public and avoid keeping science only
among specialists is more emphasized. Conveying disaster science to society is especially
important, because it is directly associated with people's lives and safety, and society is alsointerested in disaster-related knowledge. The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake was anopportunity to rethink the existing way of science communication.

1: Science Communication in Japan and the Great East Japan Earthquake
Taken in the broad sense, science communication can be traced back to the Edo period, aswritings to disseminate knowledge about nature already existed at that time. It was the Meiji period
when modern science was introduced. Enlightenment activities on science had been conducted
through books, scientific and general magazines, and lectures until World War II. After the war, theScience and Technology Agency, established in 1956, took a leading role in publicizing and raisingawareness of science and technology. The 1970s saw the high economic growth period and theanti-pollution and anti-science and technology currents in society. In the 1980s, policy shifted from
simply developing science to recognizing that the advancement of science and technology is forthe benefit of society. Later, promotion of science communication to attract youth became also
important, to address the issue that many young people avoid majoring in science. In 1995, theScience and Technology Basic Law was enacted (Fujigaki & Hirono, 2008). In the 2000s, one-way

1enlightenment activities to compensate citizens for lack of scientific knowledge became recognizedas problematic, and the importance of interactive dialogue and outreach activities by scientists
began to be emphasized. Several universities established science communicator training courses(Shineha, 2016). Basically, science communication at that time was still aimed at improving
citizens’ understanding of science (Tanaka, 2013).
The Great East Japan Earthquake raised fundamental doubts about the situation, however.
Citizens desperately needed reliable scientific information in reaction to the devastating
earthquake, tsunami, and subsequent nuclear accident. On the contrary, the experts’communication to the public was confused, which ended up eroding confidence that citizens had in
the experts. Accordingly, the scientific community had to reconsider the conventional way ofscience communication. The 2011 disaster also raised interest in risk communication, which is toshare and discuss risks in society based on science in order to build consensus with stakeholders(Tanaka, 2013).
Let us now turn our attention to the state of science communication in Western countries.
The BSE (mad cow disease) issues brought up in the UK in the 1990s led to the distrust of thegovernment and scientists, questioning the relationship between science and society. It revealed
that increasing citizens’ scientific knowledge did not necessarily solve social problems. After this,society shifted towards citizens participating in the decision-making process and social problems
needing to be solved based on the integration of science and knowledge of stakeholders in place.
The Great East Japan Earthquake can be compared to the BSE issue in the West, in the sensethat it questioned the relationship between science and society, urging reconstruction of the way ofscience communication (Tanaka, 2013).

2: A New Approach
Since the Great East Japan Earthquake, there have been a number of efforts and pursuits
to develop communication of disaster science. Many universities and research institutes, including
the International Research Institute of Disaster Science (IRIDeS) at Tohoku University, haveprovided opportunities for citizens to share scientific knowledge, including web pages, publiclectures and science cafes. There have been many educational activities for disaster risk reduction
where disaster researchers have been involved. These can be considered also as a part ofdisaster science communication in a broad sense.
One of the advanced science communication activities that I was involved in was acollaboration project between academia and the media conducted over three years from 2016.
This project was to deepen mutual understandings between researchers and media professionals
who are key people in conveying disaster science to the public quickly in plain language. During
the project, both sides searched ways to collaborate in disaster risk reduction and in succession ofdisaster experiences. Opportunities were provided for dialogue between researchers and people
involved in newspapers, television, radio, and online media in various regions. Also, activities wereconducted in cooperation with academic and media organizations. One of the noteworthy
collaborative activities was one between researchers and the Asahi Student Newspaper. In theactivities, disaster researchers and elementary school children who are readers of the company's
newspaper conducted fieldwork in the disaster-affected area together (Photo 50-1), and thechildren published their experiences in the newspaper. Also, researchers wrote a relay series ofarticles for a total of one and a half years, explaining basic knowledge and latest findings in2

disaster science in plain language for elementary school readers (Photo 50-2). These articles
provided an opportunity for children and their parents to become familiar with disaster science, andfor researchers to explain science in an approachable manner to the public. Those were fruitfulactivities, promoting communication between researchers and the younger generation throughmedia.

Photo 50-1. Disaster science researchers and elementary school children conduct research
together in disaster-affected areas (March 2017, Arahama, Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture)

Photo 50-2. An example of a relay series of articles by researchers in a newspaper for elementaryschool children

3: Achievements and the FutureHas the communication of disaster science changed after the Great East Japan
Earthquake? The post-disaster policies of Japan clearly reflect the necessity of bidirectional
communication and the importance to address ethical, legal, and social issues (Shineha, 2016).
According to a survey by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, thelevel of public trust in scientists, which fell to about 40% immediately after the disaster, recovered
to about 80% in 2018. To date, however, a lecture format with relatively weak interactivity has still3

been most common in the occasions of science communication, such as a presentation by aresearcher followed by a brief question-and-answer session with citizen participants. Seemingly,
unlike the West, Japan has not yet shifted to a society where citizens participate in the decisionmaking process to solve problems by integrating scientific and vernacular knowledge. A possible
reason is that citizens’ sense of entitlement and social contexts are different between Japan andthe West. It is important to note that it is never easy for scientists and nonscientists to share theforefront scientific knowledge and to reach mutual understanding, as it tends to contain uncertainty
and there is often more than one right answer. Piecing these circumstances together, we likely
cannot yet conclude that a major paradigm shift in science communication has already been
completed in Japan after the 2011 disaster. However, media participants in the academia-media
collaboration project say that Tohoku University researchers have become more proactive incommunicating with society since the earthquake. Revealing the reality and challenges, the Great
East Japan Earthquake surely became a turning point to pursue a better way of science
communication.

Conclusion
As I write this paper, COVID-19 is bringing the situation and issues of science
communication to light once again, questioning relations among various stakeholders, including
experts, politicians, media, and citizens. In the future, whenever the safety of society becomes
threatened and a science-based response is required, the relationship between science andsociety and the way of science communication will be reconsidered and reconstructed. Whether
we like it or not, science inevitably influences our daily lives today. Stakeholders involved inscience communication are not only researchers who are the producers of scientific knowledge,
they are also the media who disseminate the knowledge in an easy-to-understand manner, andscience communicators of academic institutions like myself, who bridge science and society. It isalso important for citizens to be interested in science and science communication, and toparticipate in science-related decision making.

References
Fujigaki, Y. & Hirono, Y. (2008). Theoretical Perspective for Science Communication: New Edition.
In Y. Fujigaki, & Y. Hirono (Eds.), The History of Science Communication in Japan. University ofTokyo Press. (In Japanese)
Shineha, R. (2016). History and Issues of Science Communication: A Review of Discussions andPerspectives in Policy-Making. Communication Bulletin, 27, 13-29.
http://id.nii.ac.jp/1109/00003623/ (In Japanese)
Tanaka, M. (2013). Phases and discussions of communication regarding science and technology.
In M. Nakamura (Ed.), Science and politics after the disaster of March 11 in Japan. Nakanishiya.
ISBN 9784779507229 (In Japanese)4