![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
In 2015, the Hyogo Framework for Action on disaster risk reduction (DRR) expired, necessitating the introduction of a new international agreement. This article investigates the activities and achievements of the Japan civil society organization coalition for the 2015 UN World Conference on DRR (JCC2015) from the point of view of its involvement in the shaping of the new Sendai Framework for DRR. Although JCC2015 contributed to agenda setting and policy development processes and managed to secure recognition for its position on nuclear risk at a regional level, its participation did not translate into impact on the Sendai Framework to the extent it wished to achieve. The article’s findings testify to the on-going and active inclusion of non-governmental stakeholders in the UN-led global policy-making processes concerning reducing disaster risk, but they also illustrate difficulties that actors who aim to introduce new elements into the agenda need to tackle.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank to Professor Hiroshi Ohta (Waseda University) and Dr Juha Saunavaara (University of Oulu) for their advice and comments on a draft of this article. I am also indebted to members of Japanese CSOs for sharing their insights on the subject of UN WCDRR.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes
1 According to Scholte (Citation2014), the institutional aspect of governance ‘involves explicitly articulated norms, standards, customs, and rules, as well as concrete organizations that formulate, implement as well as enforce those codes’.
2 This definition may seem restrictive, inasmuch it excludes a number of civil society actors whose activities are not deemed to have a political dimension and orientation towards shaping regulatory and normative frameworks. This is especially relevant in the case of Japan, in reference to which recent studies have indicated the de-politicization of civil society sphere (e.g. Ogawa, Citation2010). Nevertheless, as the civil society actor, that is, JCC2015, and its activities chosen for the purpose of this article have a clear political focus and have aimed to contribute towards forming a new international binding framework on DRR, the presented definition is considered appropriate for the task.
3 See a collection of articles in International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, Vol. 6(2), 2015 and Vol. 7(1) (2016).
4 A man-made or human-made disaster denotes a disaster in case of which human-induced processes (environmental degradation and technological hazards) have contributed to its occurrence. Conversely, natural disasters occur due to geological, hydrological, meteorological, and biological factors (International Federation of Surveyors, Citation2006, p. 7).
5 The ‘safety myth’ describes a deeply seated view marked by a presumptuous belief that nuclear power plants in Japan were operated in a completely safe manner according to high technological standards, which led to omissions in their operational safety. The myth was promoted and sustained by the so-called nuclear village, consisting of members of business, parliament, academia, and mass media in Japan (Kingston, Citation2012a, Citation2012b).
6 The video from the event can be viewed on: http://www.preventionweb.net/globalplatform/2013/programme/ignitestage/view/394.
7 See http://www.wcdrr.org/majorgroups/organizingpartners for an explanation of the term major group.
8 A proposed revision of the original passage concerning Purpose, scope, outcome and goals in the pre-zero draft submitted by JCC2015 (Citation2014c, p. 1) reads
The present framework applies to the risk of small and large-scale, frequent and infrequent, disasters caused by natural, environmental and technological hazards and risks; as how these hazards and risks interact with each other and the idea of cascading disasters applies.
It is worth mentioning, though, that this appendix submitted by JCC2015 and containing suggestions for revisions does not include any references to nuclear energy or nuclear facilities.
9 On page 3 of the zero-draft one can find the following definition of hazard
A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon, or human activity that may cause the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation. Hazards can include latent conditions that may represent future threats and can have different origins: natural (geological, hydrometeorological, and biological) or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and technological hazards).
10 Other recommendations of JCC2015 included (1) enhancing the role of children in building resilience in communities, (2) enhancing efforts of local communities and volunteers in disaster risk reduction, and (3) greater involvement of private companies in addressing DRR and boosting cooperation between private sector and CSOs (JCC2015, Citation2013/Citation2014 [18 June 2014]).
11 To put this in a wider perspective, the final document of the fifth AMCDRR issued in Citation2012 does not contain any references to high-risk facilities, nuclear plants or man-made disasters; see Yogyakarta declaration on disaster risk reduction in Asia and the Pacific 2012.
12 Fukushima jū no kyōkun: genpatsu saigai kara hitobito o mamoru tame ni can be read at: http://fukushimalessons.jp/en-booklet.html.
13 See http://jcc2015.net/en/conference/ for more information about events accompanying the WCDRR in Sendai.
14 It has to be noted that this particular call for inclusion of local and traditional knowledge while preparing policies, and so on was present on the broader agenda for advocating greater focus on resilience in the post-HFA pushed forward by a number of CSOs. JANIC, a significant member of JCC2015, was among these CSOs actors (GNDR, Act Alliance, ADRRN, Huairo Commission, & JANIC, undated).
15 The original document, though, does not contain references to either of these terms, only ‘technological hazards’.