Development and Application of a Sensemaking Approach to Community-based Disaster Risk Governance

(1)

Choongik Choi, Hirokazu Tatano, Junho Choi / Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 6 No1 (2019) 289-301 289

Print ISSN: 2288-4637 / Online ISSN 2288-4645 doi:10.13106/jafeb.2019.vol6.no1.289

Development and Application of a Sensemaking Approach to Community-based Disaster Risk Governance

Choongik Choi¹, Hirokazu Tatano², Junho Choi³

Received: December 18, 2018 Revised: December 31, 2018 Accepted: January 10, 2019

Abstract

This paper explores community-based flood disaster risk governance by applying a sensemaking approach. The conceptual sensemaking framework consists of individual experience, dialogue, and socialization components, which together comprise an interconnected system.

This study presents a method for applying this framework by using a concerns table and a SWOT analysis to examine the concerns of residents living in a flood plain. A series of community-based workshops on flood risk reduction was conducted with residents of the flood- prone Muraida community in Shiga Prefecture, Japan. During the workshops, residents’ concerns regarding flood risk surfaced. This study used an idiographic approach to examine the proceedings of the workshops. SWOT issue analysis was used to examine the strengths and weaknesses in the Muraida community’s internal capacities, and examine the opportunities and threats in the external capacities (e.g., local government). Additionally, a SWOT strategy analysis was conducted to identify strategies for knowledge sharing and development of cooperative countermeasures that can be undertaken between the Muraida community and the local government. The results show that the concerns table can not only summarize the main concerns of all workshops, but also provide an understanding of alternative flood risk countermeasures that can be carried out.

Keywords: Community-based Disaster Management, Sensemaking, Flood Risk Governance, Muraida community, Japan JEL Classification Code: D70, D74, D83, H75, O21.

1. Introduction 1

Community residents’ concerns are very important to the process of disaster risk management decision making.

Surfacing their concerns ensures that the process followed is a democratic, participatory one, and that the process will produce higher quality results that are applicable to the specific regional context (Renn, 1997; Renn, 2004).

However, community members’ concerns have not tended to be viewed as important in the course of many disaster risk management decision-making processes. As a result, disaster risk management plans are often determined through government-led unilateral decisions.

Dibb (2003) points out that this kind of unilateral approach demonstrates an ignorance of good decision-making practices. He defined risk governance as a comprehensive

1 First Author, Professor, Department of Public Administration, Kangwon National University. South Korea.

2 Professor, DPRI, Kyoto University, Japan.

3 Corresponding Author, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Public Administration, Kangwon National University, South Korea, Tel: +82-33-250-6810, E-mail: [email protected]

process involving checking, assessing, managing, and communicating. The Risk Governance Framework developed by the International Risk Governance Council consists of multiple elements, including pre-assessment, risk appraisal, risk characterization and evaluation, risk management and comprehensive communication, and consideration of societal contexts (IRGC, 2005; Renn, 2009).

This study defines risk governance as the process of solving problems and achieving goals through the participation and cooperation of stakeholders, including governments and residents. Despite the importance of risk governance, there are few relevant case studies that apply a specific methodology for the development of community-based risk governance.

The purpose of this study is to propose a specific methodology for flood risk governance, and to examine community residents’ concerns about flood risk reduction, by applying the sensemaking theory of social constructionists. The stakeholders in flood risk governance have diverse knowledge, interests, resources, and authority.

This study presents a flood risk governance process that uses a concerns table and SWOT analysis to support a sensemaking approach to stakeholder participation. In

(2)

addition, the cooperation diverse conce more effectiv concerns, un flood risk act

& Tatano, 20 Choi & Choi, This case s Maibara City,

2. Resear

This study present a co for the devel plans. Comm governance.

types of comm model, whic messages a constructionis determined th Social cons socially by co constructionis individual pr understanding communities.

socialization.

knowledge a created throu 1994). Socia intuition, que which situati situations by Weick emph among people process (Wei describe dialo to describe a others in a co language co Dervin, 1999 constructionis

study aims to among stake erns. The inte ve communica nderstanding t

ion plans acco 014; Samadda

, 2018a; Choi study analyze

a flood-prone

rch Method

uses the cas mmunity-base opment of pa munication is Pearce (1994 munication mo ch emphasiz and informatio

st model, whic hrough stakeh

structionists m ommunication:

sts emphasiz rocess but a g of reality is f We view

According and truth are ugh social inte alization in se stions etc., fo ons are judg sharing dialog hasized that e and predict s ck, 2001; Wei ogue as occu a situation, an ommunity. The nvention abo 9). Weick (2 st, emphasize

o develop a m holders who ent of this me ation by surfa their difference ordingly (Sam ar, Okada, Cho

i & Choi, 201 es the Mura e area in Shiga

d and Mat

se of the Mur ed flood risk g articipatory dis essential for 4) points out odels. The first zes the one on. The sec ch states that older interactio maintain that re : that is, throu ze that know a social one,

formed by soc this forma to social not absolute eraction in com

ensemaking, orms an interp ged. People a

gues that they people unde situations thro ick, 2005). So urring when pe d share this c e resulting dia ut the situati 2001), who is

ed that the

method of fos have differen ethod is to fac

acing stakeho es, and deve maddar, Choi, oi, & Tatano,

8b; Yamori, 2 aida commun a Prefecture, J

terials

raida commun governance pr

aster risk red effective floo that there ar t is the transm e-way sendin cond is the t social realitie

on.

eality is const ugh dialogue.

wledge is no and that h cial interaction ation proces

l constructio s; rather, the mmunities (Ge including opi pretive lens th assign meani y have experie erstand differ ough a sensem ocial constructi

eople use lang communicatio alogue then fo on (Gergen, s a typical members o

stering nt and

cilitate olders’

eloping Misra, 2017;

2009).

nity in Japan.

nity to rocess

uction od risk

re two mission

ng of social es are

ructed Social ot an human

within s as onists, ey are

ergen, nions, hrough ing to enced.

rences making

ionists guage n with orms a 1994;

social of an

org the the

an dire to imp exp A and thei exp thei com can dev ena man

<

sen

T mea resi con con soc row and The com gov con disa

anization form organization, successful ac The individua important sou ect and indirec express it an parts importan periences.

Along these sa d indirect indiv

ir communities perts, and loc

ir concerns, mmunity vulne n be taken a velops a coh ables them nagement plan

nsemaking and

Figure 1:

This study prop ans of provid idents’ conce ncerns. As can nsists of a mat cial impacts of w contains the d vulnerability e table make mmunity conce vernance, th nceptualization aster risk in a

m a common and this com chievement of al experiences urce of dialogu ct experience w

nd describe i nt meaning t

ame lines, res vidual experien s. During com cal governmen opinions, kno erability and against disas hesive comm to make ef ns.

illustrates t d their interact

Conceptual fram

poses that the ding a visual erns and the

n be seen in <

rix in which th the risk (Vanc risk compone (Wisner, Blai es it possible

erns systema e table pr n and framin community (C

level of unde mon understa organizationa s of communit ue. Individuals with a situation

t more richly to people ab

sidents have nces regarding mmunity works

nt officers are owledge and

about counte ters.. This k unity among ffective comm

he three c tions.

mework of sens

e concerns tab representation related reas

<Table 1>, the e vertical colu clay, 2002), an ents: that is, ha

kie, Cannon, e to gather tically. In the rovides guida ng of the co Choi & Choi, 20

rstanding abo anding facilitat

l change.

ty members a s who have bo n are better ab y. Sensemakin bout individua

their own dire g disaster risk hops, resident e able to sha wisdom abo ermeasures th ind of proce residents an munity disast components

semaking

ble be used as n of commun sons for thes e concerns tab

mn contains th nd the horizont

azard, exposu

& Davis, 2004 and to asse

context of ri ance for th onsequences

018a).

out es

are oth ble ng als’

ect in ts, are out hat ss nd ter of

s a ity se ble

he tal ure

4).

ss sk he

of

(3)

C

Table 1: Conce

Social Impacts

Source: Choi a

A SWOT planning for Westbrook, 1 analysis for s Choi and Ch SWOT analy Muraida com analysis and analysis was opportunities, Muraida’s res weaknesses, flood risks t Under the cat

Choongik Choi, H

erns table

s

Health an Quality of Economic Cultural im Family an Institution Gender re and Choi (2018a

Source:

analysis is o organizationa 997; Weihrich scoping as a hoi (2018a) de ysis for scopin mmunity, this s the SWOT str s used to iden

, and threats sidents. Unde

this study e hat are inter tegories of op

Hirokazu Tatano, J

nd social well-be f the living enviro c impacts and m mpact nd community nal, legal, politica

elations a).

Google Earth(2

often used to al projects (R h, 1982). This s

tool to under escribed a m ng. In examini study used bo rategy analysi ntify the stren s relative to r the categorie examined the

nal to the M pportunities an

Junho Choi / Jour

eing

onment (livabilit material well-bein

al, and equity im

2019).

Figu

o conduct str Rauch, 2007;

study uses a S rstand socializ method of usin ing the case th the SWOT s. The SWOT ngths, weakne o the concer

es of strength factors conce Muraida comm

d threats, this

rnal of Asian Fina

ty) ng

mpacts

ure 1: Map of M

rategic Hill &

SWOT zation.

ng the of the issue T issue esses, rns of hs and

erning munity.

study exa Mur City

3.

3

M tota into

ance, Economics

Haz

Muraida

amined flood ri raida commun y and Shiga Pr

Case Stud Individual

.1. Pre-meet Experien

Muraida is a c al population o o two parts, th

and Business Vol

R zard Expos

isk reduction f nity, such as refecture.

dy of the M l Experien

ting to Unde nces

community in of close to 38 he Kami area

l 6 No1 (2019) 28

Risk Factors

sure Vu

factors that are the governme

Muraida C nce

erstand Indiv

Maibara City, 85 people, Mu and the Simo

89-301 2

ulnerability

e external to th ents of Maiba

Community

viduals’

, Japan. With uraida is divide o area. The An 291

he ara

y:

a ed ne

(4)

River, one o northern side as an irrigatio rainy season may start to o satellite map

A pre-mee residents who Because of ty flood damage 1959, the Sim Simo area is than the Ka bordering Yo destroyed by the residents’

3.2. Works Expe

Ten works were held in through Marc the resident a

of the largest e of Muraida. T

on channel, an . At that time overflow and in

of Muraida is ting was held o had experie yphoons, Mura e in August a mo area was i s flood prone, ami area. In oko Mountain Typhoon Isew

’ individual exp

shops to Un riences

hops that foc the Muraida ch 2013. They associations a

Figure 2: M

rivers in Jap The De River nd is very activ , the water le nundate the s provided below d to listen to

enced flood d aida residents and Septembe

nundated by T as it is locat September and the Ich wan. <Figure periences with nderstand In

cused on flood community fro were attended nd relevant of

Mapping individu

pan, runs alon in Muraida is ve during the vel of the De urrounding are w.

the accounts damage in Mu s experienced er 1959. In A Typhoon No. 7 ted 6 meters 1959, a rive himichi Bridge 2> shows a m h flood risk.

ndividuals’

d risk manage om December

d by 10 memb fficials from Ma

ual experiences ng the s used

heavy River eas. A

of 10 uraida.

major August 7. The lower erbank e was map of

ement r 2010 bers of aibara

City wor sum

T

<Ta con pro 201 Gam and On rout was 20, imp On pre 21, ord On info and Mar sum

of flood risk exp

y and the S rkshop in th mmarizing the The main con

able 2>. On D nfirmed by si ne areas were 11, a decision me (DIG) with d share inform October 7, tes were disc s conducted w the attendee plications for e February 3, 2 sented a com 2012 it was er to share th

November 2 orming the com d providing a f

rch 7, 2013, t mmary of all th

pressed by elde

Shiga Prefect he series ha results of all o ntents of the

ecember 10, 2 mulation. Fie e conducted o was made to h community mation about e 2011 alternat cussed. On N with 49 commu es reflected o evacuation pla 2012 the leade mmunity-based decided to o he flood risk r 23, 2012, the mmunity resid forum for them the last works he previous wo

er residents at th

ture governm d the prima of the previous workshops 2010, flood pr eld surveys to on March 3, 20 use the Disas residents in o evacuation pla

tive evacuatio November 27,

unity residents on the DIG re ans and flood er of the reside d hazard map.

organize a re reduction plan e report mee dents of the w m to share the shop was held orkshops.

he pre-meeting

ment. The fin ary purpose s workshops.

are outlined rone areas we o identify floo 011. On July 2

ster Imaginatio order to confir

ces and route on facilities an

2011, the D s. On Decemb esults and the d risk reductio

ent associatio On Septemb port meeting n with resident eting was he workshop resu eir concerns. O d, focusing on

nal of

in ere

od 26,

on rm es.

nd IG ber

eir on.

ns ber in ts.

ld, lts On

a

(5)

Table 2: Workshop schedule

Year Date Main Contents of workshop

2010 December 10 Flood prone areas confirmed by simulation.

2011 March 3 Field survey conducted for simulation to check flood prone areas in community.

July 26 1. Identified evacuation areas and routes by simulation.

2. Decision made to hold the Disaster Imagination Game (DIG) with community residents.

October 7 Identified alternative evacuation facilities and routes.

November 27 Held DIG with community residents.

December 20 1. Discussed rules for evacuation.

2. Reflected on implications of the results of the DIG in regard to flood risk reduction.

2012 February 3 1. Presentation made by a community resident of a community-based hazard map.

2. Concerns for the future were shared.

September 21 Discusssed having a “report meeting” in order to informing residents of the flood risk reduction plan.

November 23 Informed community residents of the workshop results and shared concerns.

2013 March 7 Summarization of all workshops.

4. Concern Assessment by Applying the Concern Table as a Tool to Understand Dialogue

This section explores the socialization of sensemaking in regard to concern assessment. By using the concerns table, the residents’ concerns are identified and investigated. The residents’ concerns that were raised in each of the workshops are also described and explained in detail from the perspective of their social impacts.

4.1. Decision on Flood Prone Areas: The First Workshop on December 10, 2010

A local government member provided an inundation map and a land height map made by the Flood Control Office of Shiga Prefecture <Figures 3, 4>. In the first workshop, a simulation method was used to identify flood prone areas, areas that are vulnerable to inundation. In the course of this first workshop, it was discussed that both the De and Ane Rivers are prone to flooding during the rainy season. The Ane River is a “Class A river” that flows from north of Muraida to Lake Biwa. When the river is at the flood stage, it tends to inflict significant flood damage. As a result, it is natural that Muraida residents were quite concerned about the water level of the Ane River. Members of the resident associations asked for an easy-to-understand tool that would clearly show the evacuation locations and routes.

This concern led to the development of the “Marugoto Machigoto” hazard map. Before starting the workshop, local government members should communicate the following message.

During the meeting the community residents specifically stated that they could not trust the local government for

flood risk reduction. The most likely reason for this is a lack of communication between community residents and local government. Also, to achieve flood risk reduction, it is necessary to take both structural and non-structural measures. Nonetheless, “River improvement is now in progress. However, it takes 20-30 years to complete. It should be noted that river floods break out at any time while the river improvement project is in process. Hence, residents would need ‘non-structural measures.’ The local government can help in this respect. What are the residents’

concerns?”

4.2. Field Survey: The 2nd Workshop on March 3, 2011

After using a simulation to designate the flood prone areas, the Muraida workshop members conducted a field survey to review the topography of Muraida. In particular, the validity of the designated flood prone areas and the suitability of the evacuation site were closely reviewed and examined. The ground height measure was also carefully reviewed to confirm the low ground areas with engineers. It is important to emphasize that the De and Ane Rivers can flood during the rainy season. It was also found that the grounds of Garyu Park are not suitable as an evacuation site. During the meeting it was noted that the citizens of Kami did not think that they were at risk. Residents were deeply concerned when they learned about the four-meter high “inundation hazardous districts” that had been identified in the Kami area. Their concern springs from the fact that many Kami residents believe their area is not prone to floods because the Kami area is higher than the Simo area.

It will therefore be necessary to inform them that the Kami area also may not be safe from floods.

(6)

4.3. The W Since Typh been a few ty 6 struck right This being associations d typhoon.

Typhoon N but no floodi trees that had the De Rive

Source:

Source

Workshop Co hoon Isewan yphoons that h

t immediately the case, t decided to dis

o. 6 caused h ing. The high d fallen into th er that runs a

Flood Managem

: Flood Manage

oncerns on broke out in have struck Mu

before this wo the members scuss the conc

high water leve water levels he Ane River.

along the irrig

ment Office in S Figure 3: 100

ement Office in S Figur

July 26, 201 n 1959, there

uraida. Typhoo orkshop took s of the re cerns caused b

els in the Ane were the res . The water le gation ditches

Shiga Prefecture 0 year inundation

Shiga Prefecture re 4: Ground he

11 have on No.

place.

esident by this

River, sult of evel of

s was alm Mur Tat sele be t The disc risk dec and .

n frequency ma

e.

ight map

most 15 cm h raida commu sugahana Me ected as a for too small to ac e members o cuss alternativ k information cided to condu d facilitators.

p

high. If there unity might h eeting Hall, a s rmal evacuatio ccommodate a of the reside ve evacuation

to the comm uct a DIG sess

had been mo have been in site that previ on center, was all of the reside ent associatio center sites a munity. As a sion with comm

ore rainfall, th n danger. Th iously had bee s determined ents of Muraid ons wanted nd provide floo result, it w munity residen

he he en to da.

to od as nts

(7)

C

4.4. The W During the water level g location was other locatio resident asso the members gauge locatio resident asso needing aid i management a disaster,” in

Source: Flood Fig

Choongik Choi, H

Workshop Co e course of t

gauges on th determined b n was determ ociations <See s of the reside ons that were e ociations wante n disasters an plan for “pers ncluding comm

Management O gure 5: The wate

Source: F

Hirokazu Tatano, J

oncerns on his meeting, e De River w by the local g

mined by the e Figure 5>. It ent associatio easy to see. T ed an evacuat nd discussed sons in need o munity welfare

ffice in Shiga Pr er gauges on th

Flood Managem Fig

Junho Choi / Jour

October 7, 2 locations for were decided government an

e members o is worth notin ons proposed The members tion rule for pe making a floo of aid in the ev council memb

refecture.

e De River

ment Office in Sh gure 6: Evacua

rnal of Asian Fina

2011 flood . One nd the of the ng that

water of the ersons od risk vent of bers.

4

T Wit part hou resi red the pro situ that resu part eva was prov 4

T eigh Alth are floo inun Mar map

higa Prefecture.

ation Plan Reflec

ance, Economics

.5. The Wor 2011 (DIG

The DIG was h each res ticipation was useholds in M idents share uction. First, t risks in the cess was finis uation and ins

t could be ef ults of the ticipants. This acuation cente s shared with vided in <Figu .6. The Work

The members o ht Marugoto M hough the map as, two areas od simulation

ndation. See rugoto Machig p was posted.

cting the DIG Re

and Business Vol

rkshop Con G)

conducted w sident repres s equivalent t uraida. The D

more of thei the participan eir community shed the facil structed the pa

ffective in red discussions s workshop in er and route, the participan ure 6>.

kshop Conc

of the resident Machigoto Haz ps were origin

were removed revealed tha

goto Hazard m

esults

l 6 No1 (2019) 28

ncerns on N

with 49 comm enting a ho to approximat DIG is a metho

ir concerns a ts mapped ou y area. When litator introduc articipants to ducing flood r were presen ncluded the d and the resul ts. The reside

cerns on Dec

t associations zard maps in nally going to b d from the haz at they were for a sampl map, and loca

89-301 2

November 2

munity resident ousehold, the

ely 44% of th od used to he about flood ri ut and identifie

n the mappin ced a flood ri

think of actio risk. Finally, th

ted to all th iscussion of a lting informatio ents’ DIG map

c. 20, 2011

decided to po the communit be posted in te zard list after th not at risk f le copy of th ations where th 295

27,

ts.

eir he elp

sk ed ng sk ns he he an on is

ost ty.

en he for he he

(8)

An evacuat were identifie workshop. H workshop rea evacuation r rainfall. Given their immed evacuating fro

4.7. The W Septe

The social already regist aid in disaste to them dur individuals or but who had result, they information a department.

community fa needing aid i existing list o revised and involvement o members was would have t based hazard local governm during emerg

Sourc

tion route and ed by the resid

However, pa alized that so routes would

n this, it is im diate situatio

om a flooded a

Workshop Co ember 21, 20

l welfare dep tered vulnerab ers” in order to

ing emergenc r households w

not yet been were not a nd special sup

Because of t aces many diff

n disasters”. T of “persons ne updated by of the same g s revised, eac heir house loc d map. More ment would t gencies, local

ce: Flood Manag Figure 7: E

d appropriate ents during th articipants in ome of the o be impassa mportant for re n and its area.

oncerns on 012

partment of t ble residents a provide speci cies. Howeve who may qual registered by ble to take pport offered b these unregis iculties over th Therefore, it w eeding aid in d

the local co group membe ch person need

cation marked over, since a take time to community r

gement Office in Eight Marugoto M

evacuation sh he course of th the subse riginally desig ble after a esidents to co constraints

Feb. 3, 2012

the city office as “persons ne ial care and su er, there are ify for this cate

the city office advantage o by the social w stered persons

he issue of “pe was decided th disasters” wou ommunity wit ers. Once the

ding aid in dis on the comm assistance fro

reach such v resources wou

n Shiga Prefectu Machigoto Haza

helters he DIG equent gnated heavy nsider when

2 and

e had eeding

upport many egory, . As a of the welfare

s, the ersons hat the uld be th the

list of asters munity-

m the victims

uld be tapp ava

T Sep 21.

disc Dur enh mos wer (Am actu of loca eme T

“rep wou pro rep drill org whe

4

O with with on

ure.

ard Map Location

ped to assist t ailable.

There was a ptember 18, th Consequently cussed conce ring the works hanced by inco

st of the map re added. The mong the nine

ually died beca Muraida were ations were in ergency goods This workshop

port meeting”

uld allow the gress on floo ort meeting w l day” in De anizing the m en the DIG wa

.8. The Wor 2013

On November h Muraida com h the worksho

how the flood

ns and Sample

them before ot

heavy rain hat is, before y, the member rns that arose hop the comm orporating the remained unc e pictures of ni e areas were ause of an inu e included. R ncluded. Inform

s were printed p was also us

for the comm e group the od risk reduct would be condu

ecember. Th meeting would

as scheduled in rkshop Con

23, 2013, th mmunity reside op members. T d risks were a

ther outside su

(50 mm/hr) the workshop rs of the reside e because of munity-based h residents’ op hanged, seve ne risky areas e two areas w undation.) The Residents’ nam

mation about d on the other s sed to create

unity resident opportunity tion. It was d

ucted on the a he places an

be the same n 2011.

ncerns on N

he “report mee ents (48 reside

The agenda in addressed ove

upport becom

in Muraida o p on Septemb

ent associatio this heavy ra hazard map w inions. Althoug ral new featur s were include where residen “isolated land mes and hou

flood risks an side of the ma a plan for th s, an event th

to share the ecided that th annual “disast nd methods e as those use

November 2

eting” was he ents in total) an ncluded a repo er the course

es

on ber

ns in.

as gh es ed.

nts ds”

se nd ap.

he hat eir he ter of ed

23,

eld nd ort

of

(9)

the past two years, and an opportunity for sharing concerns about coping with flood risks by using the community-based

hazard map. For a summary of the concerns table, see

<Table 3>, below.

Table 3: Summary of concern table

Date Social Impacts Risk component & Main concerns

Dec. 10, 2010

Living environment (Livability)

Hazards

9 The De River may have inundated during the rainy season than did the Ane River.

Exposure

9 The Kami area is identified as a flood prone area by simulation.

Vulnerability

9 Information on the ground height and inundation height on the street is needed to decide the appropriate evacuation facility and routes.

Family and Community Vulnerability

9 A resident-to-resident information delivery system is needed for evacuation.

Institutional, legal, political, and equity impacts

Vulnerability

9 Community residents may have not trusted the local government because of a lack of communication with each other.

Mar. 3, 2011

Hazards

9 The De River may have inundated more during the rainy season than did the Ane River.

Vulnerability

9 Information on the ground height and inundation height on the street are needed to determine the evacuation facility and routes.

9 The grounds of Garyu Park are not suitable as a flood evacuation shelter because there is no facility on site. There are facilities for earthquake evacuees, however.

Family and Community Vulnerability

9 Almost all Kami area residents think that their area is not at risk.

Jul. 26, 2011

Hazards

9 Typhoon No. 6 had struck just one week before the workshops and people had recent experience with the flood risk in Muraida.

Exposure

9 The sluice gate of the De River is quite old and can be easily damaged. Trees may also fall in the river, thereby causing floods as water levels rise.

Vulnerability

9 The Tatsugahana Meeting Hall is more suitable as an evacuation shelter than the Garyu Park grounds (the previous evacuation site), because it has a facility that protects residents from wind and rain.

Oct. 7, 2011

Hazards

9 Several years ago, one resident died at the agricultural irrigation canal due to flooding there.

9 Many ditches running along the community road have the potential for inundation.

Vulnerability

9 The writing on the Marugoto Hazard Map should be enlarged to accommodate elderly residents.

Family and community Vulnerability

9 Evacuation rules and processes need to be developed to accommodate persons with special needs.

Nov. 27, 2011

Capacity

9 The Tatsugahana Meeting Hall is a suitable evacuation facility for flood risk but is not large enough to accommodate all residents .

9 The Sohou temple for the Kami area and the Tatsugahana Meeting Hall for the Simo area are better for evacuation facilities.

9 The Nakamichi Road is the main road for evacuation, but if the road is flooded, the farm road is an alternative.

Family and community Capacity

9 Developing the evacuation rules based on DIG results.

Dec. 20, 2011

Exposure

9 The sluice gate located at the mouth of De River has the potential for flood risk, but the Muraida community does not have the right and ownership to repair it.

(10)

Capacity

9 As a result of the DIG exercise, the Marugoto Machigoto Hazard map was posted on the community streets in eight flood prone areas.

9 As a result of the DIG exercise, main and suitable alternate evacuation routes and shelters were finalized.

Feb. 3, 2012

Capacity

9 At a general meeting, community residents were informed about the Marugoto Machigoto Hazard map and the use of the simple water gauge.

Capacity

9 The social welfare department of the city office has information on persons needing aid in disasters. In order to provide care and support to them, the information is needed by the local community.

Mar. 7, 2013

Hazard

9 The Ane and De Rivers appear risky when heavy rain falls.

Nov. 23, 2013

Vulnerability

9 Syoren Temple and Kita Mountain are not suitable as evacuation facilities because they are vulnerable to landslides.

Family and Community Capacity

9 Evacuation is not encouraged by car on community roads. Some residents want to use cars for evacuation but it cause traffic congestion.

Capacity

9 Collaboration is needed urgently with community welfare commissioners for “persons needing aid in disasters” because community welfare commissioners check on them regularly, and understand their specific needs for assistance.

Table 4: SWOT issue analysis

Strengths Weaknesses

9 The members of the resident associations who have participated in the workshops are very active in expressing their opinions and want to make their community flood- resistant.

9 Over time, the members of the resident associations begin to take initiatives on the flood risk management plan.

9 The Muraida community is a flood prone area. The De River is often inundated, and the old sluice gate of De River is

vulnerable to damage. The Kami area has potentially hazardous zones, and many agricultural irrigation ditches run beside community roads.

9 Residents who did not participate in the workshops are not aware of their area’s flood risk.

9 There is no plan for persons needing aid in a disaster.

Opportunities Threats

9 The Maibara city and Shiga Prefecture governments have the political will to support flood risk reduction. This was seen in their rapid response to Muraida residents’ concerns about flood risk through the development of the Marugoto Machigoto hazard map and by holding the DIG.

9 After the workshop, residents and local government officials will not meet frequently. This will make it difficult to

ensure the continuance of cooperation.

9 The river improvement plan is not complete and is still ongoing.

5. Scoping by Applying the SWOT Analysis as a Tool for Understanding Socialization

5.1. SWOT Issue Analysis

Through the use of the concerns table, residents’

concerns were summarized and shown to change dynamically as the workshops progressed. As mentioned in section 2, a SWOT issue analysis and a SWOT strategy analysis were carried out. The main concerns raised in the concerns table were placed in the SWOT issue analysis table as is seen in <Table 4>.

In the context of the SWOT analysis, “Strengths” include the passion of the members of the resident associations

who participated in the process. These members were very active in expressing their opinions, and they wanted to help their communities become flood resistant. Over time, the members of the resident associations began to take more initiatives in the development of the flood risk management plan. “Weaknesses” are those factors that are tied to specific local characteristics. For example, the Muraida community often experiences flooding from the De River, and the old sluice gate of De River is vulnerable to damage.

The Kami area has potentially hazardous zones, and many agricultural irrigation ditches run along community roads, providing an opportunity for flooding. Also, many Kami residents who did not participate in the workshops are not aware of their area’s flood risk. Another weakness is that no

(11)

plan exists to assist persons needing special aid in a disaster. “Opportunities” include the local government will to reduce flood risk in the Muraida community. The Maibara city and Shiga Prefecture governments demonstrated their will by responding quickly to Muraida residents’ concerns about flood risk through the development of the Marugoto Machigoto hazard map and by holding the DIG workshop.

“Threats” includes the fact that after the workshop, residents and local government officials would not meet frequently, making it difficult to ensure the continuance of cooperation.

Another threat was that the river improvement plan was not complete and was still underway.

5.2. SWOT Strategy Analysis

In the SWOT issue analysis, the internal capacities of the Muraida community are the strengths and weaknesses, while the opportunities and threats are the external capacities of the community such as local government. Therefore, if we endeavor to combine the internal and external factors through the SWOT strategy analysis, the potential for cooperation, knowledge sharing and countermeasure implementation between the local community and government becomes readily apparent. For example, the Muraida community residents have traditional flood reduction knowledge, while local governments have technical knowledge. Neither the residents nor the governments have a deep understanding of the others’ knowledge. It is important that they share this knowledge with each other, not only to strengthen their flood risk reduction efforts but also to prevent their knowledge from being lost by not being shared.

This section outlined an approach for the development of new knowledge about flood risk countermeasures by using the SWOT Strategy Analysis as scoping tool. The details of the analysis are shown in <Table 5>.

The SO strategy is the result of the interaction of the internal and external strengths of the Muraida community and the Shiga Prefecture. Community residents should share flood risk information and sustainably enhance the community’s capacity against flood risks by cooperating with the local government. The ST strategy focuses on the internal strength of the Muraida community in the absence of assistance from Shiga Prefecture after the workshops are finished. (Shiga Prefecture officials would seldom visit the community after the completion of the workshops.) Recognizing this, community residents should often hold community events about flood risk reduction so as not to lose community interest about flood risk countermeasure sustainability. To put it concretely, the community leader and eight areas group leaders from the eight hazard areas in Muraida should regularly share flood risk information with all residents through community meetings that are held in a month that is specifically designated for focusing on flood risk management. In the Muraida community, events are regularly conducted in the same month each year, such as the spring cleaning event in March, the sports event in May, and the disaster drill in November. Similarly, a special month should be set aside for the community to discuss ways of strengthening their flood risk resistance. The WO strategy shows how the internal weaknesses of the Muraida community can be overcome with assistance from the Shiga Prefecture government. Many flood risk countermeasures will be conduct with the assistance of local government, such as setting a water level signboard to check the water level of the Ane River, and posting Marugoto Machigoto hazard maps at flood prone areas. The WT strategy is the result of the interaction of Muraida’s internal weaknesses and the lack of assistance from the Shiga Prefecture government after the workshops have ended. Specifically, after the workshops are over, community residents will document and check the location and situation of persons in Muraida who need aid in disasters. The problem of persons needing aid in disasters was often raised in the course of the workshops. In the final workshop, the problems were discussed in depth, but no conclusive resolution could be reached.

Table 5: The SWOT Strategy Analysis

Opportunities Threats

Strengths SO strategy

By cooperating with local government, community residents should share flood risk information and sustainably enhance the capacity against flood risks.

ST strategy

Community residents often hold community events about flood risk reduction in order to maintain interest regarding flood risk countermeasure sustainability.

Weaknesses WO strategy

Many flood risk countermeasures will be conducted through local government assistance, such as installing a water level signboard to check the water level of Ane River, and posting Marugoto Machigoto Hazard Maps at flood prone areas.

WT strategy

After finishing the workshops, community residents will document and check the location and situation of persons in Muraida needing aid in disasters.