"Searching for an Area Studies Approach to Disaster Prevention and Rehabilitation from Experiences of Involvement in Rehabilitation Work"[Initiative 4 & Junior Researchers Seminars Joint Seminar](Initiative 4 Seminar)
Date: July 11-12 2008 (Fri.-Sat.)
Venue: E207, 2nd floor of East Building, CSEAS
【Record of Activity】
On the first day, cases of sudden disasters – earth quakes, tsunamis, fires – were introduced. The discussion focused on “community” in the context of disaster prevention and recovery and its relationship with government and aid organizations. While community is considered the key player in disaster prevention and recovery, there are some cases where close ties between community members do not exist, at least in the sense assumed by policy makers, and disasters precipitate increasing polarization and antagonism among community residents.
In the general discussion on the first day, there was discussion on understanding approaches by communities/research when a disaster happens, taking into account the divisions and disparities among the victims. It was pointed out that for people in a given locale, participation in disaster prevention or recovery itself may serve as the starting point for developing closer ties within the community. In addition, some cases of communities that have reached out to other communities which have experienced similar disasters to form a kind of “disaster victims network” were introduced. Furthermore, the importance of taking an issue-oriented approach to area-studies research by examining the relationship of stakeholders, such as researchers or aid workers involved with the community in question, and the disaster victims themselves was emphasized.
On the second day, cases of slowly progressing disasters – climate change, water shortage, salinization, HIV/AIDS – were introduced. It was shown that these issues were deeply related to various aspects of globalization, such as the market economy, the modern concept of ownership, and the spread of democratic ideals.
In the general discussion on the second day, two main points – what role area studies researchers can play in disaster relief, and how researchers should view and deal with local knowledge – were discussed.
Area studies researchers have viewed “area” from the standpoint of individual lives, and taking into account pre-existing social conditions and various issues and, have advised policy makers and NGOs on how to deal with problems arising from a disaster which are unique to that “area.” However, in some cases the information provided by area studies researchers is seen as different from the “objective data” needed by public aid agencies or to conflict with the opinion of technical experts who are involved in recovery efforts. The opinion was expressed that for area studies researchers to work with others involved in recovery efforts, it is necessary to establish communication between stakeholders.
Related to this issue, several participants expressed similar criticisms that up to now too much emphasis has been placed on knowledge from “objective” analyses as a basis for decisions regarding recovery efforts. It was also suggested that the researchers need to critically reexamine the existing idea of “knowledge” which simply tries to make a decision on the “correct” path of recovery and thus fixes the identity and integrity of the region. Furthermore, some argued that area studies research should strive to fulfill the role of connecting multi-faceted knowledge.
(Shuhei Kimura, Masato Kasezawa, Makoto Nishi)