[Special Feature: 10 Years Since 3.11] Reconstruction from the Perspective of a Small Community: 10 Years in the Okawa District of Ishinomaki City

Image: Nagatsura and Onosaki settlements where reconstruction work is progressing (August 2, 2019, drone photography by Associate Professor Osamu Tsukihashi, Kobe University)

What is needed for people who have lost their homes due to a large-scale natural disaster to rebuild their lives with dignity? Since the Great East Japan Earthquake, I have continued to visit the Okawa district of Ishinomaki City, Miyagi Prefecture, with this question in mind. The region is now approaching a quiet "10th anniversary of the disaster" due to the spread of COVID-19. Events and meetings have been cancelled across the board, and visits from volunteers have decreased. Approximately 400 households from four of the nine administrative districts (settlements) that make up the region have moved inland. While fishermen continue to operate in their former residential areas, the sounds of construction and trucks—part of the Ishinomaki City Earthquake Disaster Reconstruction Basic Plan aimed at completion by the end of this fiscal year, including seawalls—echo across the beaches that have lost their inhabitants.

How have the people of the Okawa district walked the path toward "reconstruction" over these 10 years? What difficulties and problems did they face? We trace the 10 years of reconstruction as seen from a small community.

The Okawa district is located in the northern part of Ishinomaki City, where the sea, river, and mountains meet at the mouth of the Shin-Kitakami River, and was home to 2,489 people. The Great East Japan Earthquake claimed 418 lives, and four settlements near the river mouth (Magaki, Kamaya, Nagatsura, and Onosaki) were designated as disaster hazard areas. The tsunami, which traveled up the river, caused significant damage to settlements 3 to 5 km from the river mouth; in Kamaya, over 30% of residents were victims, and in Magaki, over 40%. At Ishinomaki Municipal Okawa Elementary School in the Kamaya settlement, 74 children and 10 faculty and staff members were killed or went missing.

After living in evacuation centers, people from the four settlements moved into temporary housing approximately 15 km inland from the disaster site in the summer of 2011. Regarding housing reconstruction, five households in Magaki successfully relocated to higher ground locally, but other settlements moved collectively to the "Futago Complex" approximately 15 km inland. About 30% of Ishinomaki's residents moved to permanent housing in stages. While farming and fishing continue in the former residential areas, it took until August 2013 for electricity to be restored to the Onosaki and Nagatsura settlements, and until the fall of 2016 for public water service to return.

In 2004, I visited the Onosaki settlement for a series on nature and people, interviewing Ken and Kiyoko Sakashita. Ken served as the head of the fisheries cooperative for 20 years, and Kiyoko ran a small guesthouse where visitors could experience a life of part-time farming and part-time fishing to share the region's charms. I was struck by the beauty of Nagatsura-ura, a quiet inner sea surrounded by broadleaf mountains, and the way of life of the people there.

When I visited after the disaster, the area had suffered catastrophic damage. In the Kamaya settlement, everything except Okawa Elementary and two reinforced concrete buildings had been washed away, and most of the Nagatsura settlement was submerged due to land subsidence. Traveling along a narrow road that looked like a lagoon on both sides and crossing a temporary bridge to reach the Onosaki settlement, I found Ken busy working to restore the fishing grounds, while Kiyoko was serving drinks to volunteers.

The Great East Japan Earthquake is often called a "disaster of the land." What is needed for people who have lost the very foundations of their lives and memories—their homes and towns—to live there again? I wanted to observe this from a medium-to-long-term and structural perspective, so I have accompanied the reconstruction process through "participant observation." Through this, I began to think that people's dignity is greatly influenced by whether their opinions are reflected in infrastructure development such as seawalls and housing, and whether they can share places and stories that serve as the foundation for regional connections, such as rituals and collaborative work. Below, I look back on the 10 years of the Okawa district from these two perspectives in chronological order.

During the first two years, there were no major external changes at the disaster site. Fishermen worked to rebuild their livelihoods while still feeling their way forward. Nagatsura-ura is an excellent fishing ground where large oysters grow in a single year thanks to its brackish water environment, but more than half of the aquaculture rafts and the cooperative shipping workshop were lost in the tsunami. Fishermen cleared the fishing grounds and sought ways to ship the remaining oysters. Regarding housing reconstruction, the Kamaya settlement agreed on collective relocation inland in May 2011, but discussions continued in the other three settlements. For the region as a whole, the "Okawa District Reconstruction Council," composed of representatives from each settlement, was established in December of that year.

"What is reconstruction?" Ken asked me this in the summer of 2012. In late July, plans for seawall construction were explained to the residents of the Onosaki and Nagatsura settlements facing Nagatsura-ura. The plan was to extend an 8.4m high seawall through the Nagatsura coast to the banks of the Kitakami River to handle an L1 (once-in-a-century) tsunami. Why was only the seawall being finalized when there was no prospect for housing reconstruction or the restoration of electricity and water? What would be the impact on the fishing grounds? When asked, I thought his questions were reasonable. In September of that year, I went to Onosaki with two architecture students who were supporting the creation of reconstruction plans by holding resident workshops in Ogihama (Ishinomaki City) on the Oshika Peninsula. The students drew a simulation of what Nagatsura-ura would look like with the seawall. Seeing it, Ken asked, "How can we stop this?" The students replied, "It is important to form a collective will among the residents."

Ken reached out to the fishermen, and on December 18, the first "Meeting to Consider the Reconstruction and Fisheries of Nagatsura-ura" was held in the temporary housing Assembly Room. With Professor Masayoshi Takeuchi of Tohoku University of Art and Design and Associate Professor Masahiro Onuma of Tohoku Institute of Technology (now Professor) as facilitators, they listened to opinions regarding the seawall and regional reconstruction. Associate Professor Onuma summarized the fishermen's questions, confirmed them with the Ishinomaki City Kahoku General Branch, and explained the findings. Initially, discussions were disjointed due to speculation based on uncertain information, but as meetings continued, a direction emerged to lower the Onosaki seawall and aim for the construction of a "Banya" (fishermen's hut) with functions for both a fishermen's rest area and a community facility. In September 2013, the General Incorporated Association Nagatsura-ura Umihito was established with 30-year-old fisherman Hideki Ogawa as representative, aiming for: 1) Banya construction and fisheries revitalization, 2) expansion of exchange, and 3) transmission of regional memories.

Over the next three years, the region was shaken by debates over whether to preserve or demolish the damaged Okawa Elementary School building. In February 2013, it was announced that the four settlements would be designated as disaster hazard areas (places where people cannot live). In March of the same year, Ishinomaki Municipal Okawa Junior High School closed due to a decrease in the number of students, leading families with school-aged children to move out of the area. Okawa Elementary continued classes in a temporary building on the grounds of Ishinomaki Municipal Futamata Elementary School near the temporary housing. The Okawa District Reconstruction Council searched for candidate sites and petitioned the city to rebuild within the district, but in November 2016, Ishinomaki City decided to close the school.

Regarding Okawa Elementary, parents who lost children had been asking Ishinomaki City to clarify the circumstances of the evacuation, but progress was difficult. In March 2014, 19 family members of 23 children filed a lawsuit against the city and prefecture. The preservation or demolition of the school building also became a topic of debate. In meetings held for each settlement, while some felt it should be preserved to pass on the story of the disaster, others said they "did not want to see the school building where sad memories remain," and opinions were almost evenly split between "demolition" and "preservation." In November 2014, a weekly magazine reported on options listed in a document where Ishinomaki City officials consulted the Okawa District Reconstruction Council on preservation policies—"preserve all facilities," "preserve some facilities," or "demolish the building and view images via AR (Augmented Reality)"—under the dramatized headline "Okawa Elementary School Theme Park Plan," causing unrest in the community. Young people who graduated from Okawa Elementary appealed to "please save the school," and newspapers and television reported on this extensively.

Meanwhile, the fishermen proceeded with fundraising for the Banya construction and exchange activities with supporters from outside the prefecture. With support from a French NPO and the Nippon Foundation, the Banya was completed in October 2014. In April of the following year, the fishermen's wives began the "Hamanasu Cafe," serving local ingredients once a week. Regarding the Onosaki seawall, adjustments were made to make it higher than before only by the amount of land subsidence (2.6m high), and Ishinomaki City approved the plan change at the end of 2015. For the Nagatsura seawall, an explanatory meeting for the start of construction was held in May 2015. Participants, who had heard nothing for two years since the June 2013 meeting and were suddenly informed of the start of work, raised voices saying, "We haven't heard about this." At the meeting, it became clear that the city had been proceeding with the plan on the grounds that there had been no particular opposition at the previous meeting. The seawall would not only make it harder for fishermen to access their boat moorings but also interfere with the shrine's rituals, which had been transformed into a maritime procession after the disaster. Residents argued against it, but construction began in June.

From 2016 to the present, the disaster site has changed significantly due to large-scale infrastructure work. The population decline and aging that had begun before the disaster accelerated, and structural changes in local society became apparent, such as the dissolution or suspension of activities of the "Keiyaku-ko" (traditional community mutual aid organizations) in the Kamaya and Nagatsura settlements. People from the Okawa district had moved into temporary housing by settlement unit, and mutual aid relationships within the temporary complexes had grown, but it was decided that moves into disaster public housing would begin in stages from the fall of 2017. Regarding the Okawa Elementary school building, the mayor decided in March 2016 to preserve it.

In this context, people gathering at the "Hamanasu Cafe" began to express a desire to "keep the memories of the region in a tangible form" and "convey that there was a life here." In January 2016, Associate Professor Osamu Tsukihashi of Kobe University, leader of the "'Lost Homes' Model Restoration Project," which creates 1:500 scale models of communities along the Sanriku coast, visited and met with Representative Ogawa of Nagatsura-ura Umihito and District Head Ryosuke Abe of Kamaya. Resident volunteers and people from the area visited a model exhibition in Iwaki City, Fukushima Prefecture, and formed an executive committee. In collaboration with four university laboratories, they held one-week workshops for the Kamaya and Magaki districts in November, and for the Nagatsura and Onosaki districts the following March, where students created models based on interviews with residents.

The model workshops continued thereafter during Obon and other times, and at the end of 2018, a record collection titled "Memories of the Okawa District Hometown" (General Incorporated Association Nagatsura-ura Umihito), which gathered "mutterings" of memories, was published. Digital archives and AR apps were also created with the cooperation of Associate Professor Hidenori Watanabe of Tokyo Metropolitan University (at the time, now Professor at the University of Tokyo). The residents' memories include many warm episodes, such as gathering clams, sledding, and other relationships with rich nature, as well as memories of elementary school. Since November 2017, the models of the Kamaya and Magaki districts have been exhibited in a prefabricated building near Okawa Elementary and have been used by storytellers guiding visitors to the school.

Looking back on the 10 years of the Okawa district, the image of people desperately facing the challenges that arose one after another in the torrent of "reconstruction" emerges. Regarding infrastructure development, as construction progressed and seawalls and bridges appeared around 2019, voices saying "I haven't heard (about the plans)" began to be heard again. In terms of maintaining regional connections and sharing stories, it is becoming difficult to maintain rituals and community organizations due to aging and population outflow. In this environment, people began activities to create models of the region from before the disaster and pass on stories of their relationships with nature and people. Discussions continue regarding what should be passed on at the Okawa Elementary School disaster ruins, where development is progressing.

The background of the voices saying "I haven't heard about this" regarding infrastructure development is thought to be a communication problem. To determine the framework for reconstruction, Ishinomaki City conducted three resident intention surveys in April, June, and September 2011 for the residents of the Okawa district. However, many residents have no memory of them. Even those who do remember say, "In a situation where we didn't even know what tomorrow would bring, we couldn't answer questions like 'Do you want to cultivate rice paddies?'"

Most municipalities affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake formulated their basic reconstruction plans within 2011. One Ishinomaki City official says, "There was a flow where formulating a basic plan within the year was necessary to receive allocations of reconstruction grants from the following fiscal year." To pass the plan in the December assembly, the outline had to pass the September assembly. Therefore, the resident questionnaire was conducted in June. However, as of June, the affected people were living in evacuation centers. Amidst the search for missing persons, securing crematoriums, and deep grief and loss, how many people could understand the reconstruction system and provide answers? Some city officials also point to the impact of municipal mergers. The Okawa district merged with Ishinomaki City in a wide-area merger in 2005. The staff at the Kahoku General Branch, who deal directly with residents, had been reduced to nearly half of what it was during the former Kahoku Town Hall era at the time of the disaster. There was a shortage of manpower, and the staff themselves were victims. The outline of reconstruction was decided under such circumstances.

After 10 years, the construction projects included in the basic reconstruction plan are nearing completion. However, the population decline that began before the disaster has accelerated, and the number of people crossing the completed bridges or tilling the restored farmland has decreased. Commuting to fish is a heavy burden on the elderly. In the relocated housing complexes, it is becoming difficult to organize collaborative work such as weeding parks. There is also anxiety about the future for those living in disaster public housing (rentals), but opportunities for discussion have decreased due to the pandemic.

Once a reconstruction project is decided, it is difficult to change course. That is why it seems important for "the people living there" to be actively involved in consensus-building at the initial stage, but as seen in the example of the Okawa district, there are difficulties. Even if explanatory meetings are held, the psychological cost of participating is higher the more severe the damage. It is also difficult for those who work outside the region or fishermen with different daily schedules to participate. There is also the reality that it is difficult for women to participate. Furthermore, not all residents have specialized knowledge of civil engineering or urban planning. For effective discussion, I believe support is needed to decipher the reconstruction system, translate administrative terminology into words that fit everyday sensibilities, and encourage dialogue.

As a framework for supporting reconstruction town-building, in the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, a "two-stage system" was used, and experts were dispatched to "town-building councils" for block land readjustment projects. In the Chuetsu Earthquake, there was a system where regional reconstruction supporters provided aid tailored to the local situation, funded by the "Niigata Prefecture Chuetsu Earthquake Reconstruction Fund" established by the prefecture. There are reconstruction funds for the Great East Japan Earthquake as well, but they are managed by local governments and have changed in nature. There is also regional support from university laboratories, but there are major challenges to sustainability, such as transportation costs.

In this context, in the Onosaki settlement, fishermen reacted quickly to the seawall plan, and dialogue was promoted by obtaining expert support. Being able to specifically draw a future vision for the region rooted in pre-disaster efforts made it possible to obtain grants, leading to regional revitalization activities such as the Banya construction, cafe operation, and the model project. In addition to pre-disaster ties, the human network grew thicker as people who came to volunteer returned. It can be considered that the accumulation of social relationships from before the disaster increased the region's resilience.

Over the past 10 years, there has been a tendency in disaster-affected areas to see seawall construction based on uniform standards, "public-private partnership" measures that prioritize speed by treating model-room-like "reconstruction" images as success stories, and the promotion of migration and sixth-sector industrialization projects that feel forced. However, there is no such town as a "disaster area," and no such person as a "disaster victim." To rebuild a place where everyone living there can have a place and a role, I believe it is necessary to have pre-disaster efforts along with a system that translates reconstruction regulations, encourages dialogue between people in different positions, and allows experts, supporters, and people with an attachment to the land to cooperate with each other.

Ten years after the disaster, the generation that supported reconstruction in the Okawa district is now in their 70s and 80s, and those who were teenagers at the time are about to enter the workforce. Reconstruction will continue. I want to continue watching over the progress of the people.