Paper short abstract:

I discuss anthropological approaches to natural disaster. Based on a comparative view between the Great Eastern Japan Earthquake and Tsunami(GEJET)and, I examine the validity of fieldwork, which is a traditional way of Anthropological research, and the possibility of anthropological contribution to the aftermath survey of natural disaster.

Paper long abstract:

The GEJET and The GHE are two big disasters on Japan after WWⅡ. I will ask beginning by what the concept of the"public" in stricken areas is and how anthropologists could contribute to the "public"? Let me start a simple observation about community. The reason for focusing on community is that it has been acknowledged that local community is the basis of the "public" domain, where volunteer activities such as NPOs have been activity engaged. So, I will compare the GHE with the GEJET, focusing on activities in suffering local communities, we see some important differences in (1) the structure of community; (2) the changes in community, which the disaster brought about; and (3) the reconstruction of community. Today, even local a natural disaster tends to be considered as national tragedy: the disaster's images, along with those of refugees, are disseminated through the national media, and may converge with nationalism. As compared to the GHE, this national framework is particularly apparent after the GEJET. But neither public space nor public responsibility is segmented only by the national framework. There may be a tense relationship between community and national framework, particularly in the case of natural disaster. The anthropologist will be to examine whether and how community can be rebuilt, something to which they must pay extremely close attention by producing the "public" at the community level and the local society, not at the nation-state level.