Japan’s Disaster Recovery Governance and Historically Configured Local Community Institutions: Insights from the Great East Japan Earthquake

Disaster recovery governance has gained significance in recent years, highlighting the critical role of community involvement in recovery processes. The governance of disaster recovery varies across countries, shaped by the socio-political system and its path dependencies. In particular, decentralization and citizen participation in local governance before a disaster are key factors in analyzing the structure and functions of disaster recovery governance. This study examines the historical evolution of local governance and community involvement in Japan, one of the world’s most disaster-prone countries, to identify the unique characteristics of its disaster recovery governance. Previous research suggests Japan’s recovery governance has been dominated by top-down frameworks, with limited citizen participation during the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake recovery. We tested these assumptions by analyzing data obtained from case studies of three tsunami-affected areas (Onagawa, Higashimatsushima, and Natori) and two nuclear accident-affected areas (Okuma and Futaba) following the earthquake. Our findings reveal that, in tsunami-affected areas, the influence of community organizations on policymaking and their collaboration with municipalities varied significantly even before the disaster, impacting the success of stakeholder coordination in post-tsunami community relocation programs. In nuclear accident-affected areas, pre-disaster policy regimes related to nuclear plant construction influenced citizen participation in recovery processes. Overall, the study reveals that Japan’s disaster recovery governance is deeply rooted in local community institutions that were historically configured before the disaster. This collaboration has become customary among municipalities and community organizations and is embedded in local contexts. However, the local variations of these communities often result in regional inequalities in recovery. The study raises concerns that applying a bottom-up approach in such a context could further exacerbate these inequalities. Additionally, our study highlights the potential effectiveness of adaptive disaster recovery governance that moves beyond rigid top-down or bottom-up approaches.