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

2021/03/05

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

What is necessary 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. Now, due to the spread of COVID-19, the region is about to mark a quiet "10th anniversary of the disaster." Events and meetings have been cancelled across the board, and visits from volunteers have decreased. Of the nine administrative districts that make up the region, approximately 400 households from four districts (settlements) have moved inland. While fishermen continue to operate in their former residential areas, the sounds of construction and trucks—positioned in the Ishinomaki City Earthquake Reconstruction Basic Plan with a target of the end of this fiscal year for seawalls and other infrastructure—echo across the beaches that have lost their inhabitants.

How have the people of the Okawa district walked the path toward "reconstruction" over these past 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 away from the river mouth; in Kamaya, over 30% of residents were victims, and in Magaki, over 40%. At Ishinomaki Municipal Okawa Elementary School, located in the Kamaya settlement, 74 children and 10 faculty and staff members died or went missing.

After living in evacuation centers, the people of 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 relocated en masse approximately 15 km inland. At the relocation site, the "Futago Housing Complex," about 30% of Ishinomaki residents moved to permanent housing in stages. While farming and fishing are carried out in the former residential areas, it took until August 2013 for power to be restored to the Onosaki and Nagatsura settlements, and until the fall of 2016 for public water restoration.

In 2004, I visited the Onosaki settlement for a series of articles on the theme of nature and people, and interviewed Mr. Ken Sakashita and his wife, Kiyoko. Ken had served as the head of the fisheries cooperative for 20 years, and Kiyoko ran a small guesthouse where guests could experience a life of part-time farming and part-time fishing to convey the charms of the region. I was impressed by the beauty of Nagatsura-ura, a quiet inner sea surrounded by broad-leaved mountains, and the lifestyle of the people.

When I visited after the disaster, the area had suffered catastrophic damage. In the Kamaya settlement, everything except Okawa Elementary School and two reinforced concrete buildings had been washed away, and most of the Nagatsura settlement was submerged due to land subsidence. Proceeding 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 completely lost their homes and towns—the foundations of their lives and memories—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 first by whether their opinions are reflected in infrastructure development such as seawalls and housing, and second, by whether they can share places and narratives 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 toward rebuilding their livelihoods while groping for a way forward. Nagatsura-ura is an excellent fishing ground where large oysters grow in a year thanks to its brackish water environment, but more than half of the aquaculture rafts and the fisheries cooperative's joint 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 to a 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 the same year.

"What is reconstruction?" Ken asked me this in the summer of 2012. In late July, a plan to construct a seawall was explained to the residents of the Onosaki and Nagatsura settlements facing Nagatsura-ura. The plan was to respond to an L1 (once-in-a-century) tsunami by extending an 8.4m high seawall through the Nagatsura coast to the banks of the Kitakami River. Why was only the seawall being formalized 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 the same 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 architect Professor Masayoshi Takeuchi of Tohoku University of Art and Design and Associate Professor (now Professor) Masahiro Onuma of Tohoku Institute of Technology 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 height of the Onosaki seawall and aim for the construction of a "Banya" (fisherman's hut) that would function as both a rest area for fishermen and a meeting facility. In September 2013, the General Incorporated Association Nagatsura-ura Unabito was established, led by 30-year-old fisherman Hideki Ogawa, aiming for: 1) Banya construction and fisheries revitalization, 2) expansion of exchange, and 3) transmission of regional memories in stages.

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, and families with school-aged children began moving out of the area. Okawa Elementary School continued classes in a temporary building on the grounds of Ishinomaki Municipal Futamata Elementary School near the temporary housing. While the Okawa District Reconstruction Council searched for candidate sites and petitioned the city to rebuild within the district, Ishinomaki City decided to close the school in November 2016.

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 deceased 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 viewed it as something that should be preserved to pass on the disaster's lessons, others said, "I don't want to see a school building that holds such sad memories," 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 sounded out the Okawa District Reconstruction Council on preservation policies—"leave all facilities," "leave some facilities," or "demolish the building and view images via AR (Augmented Reality)"—under the title "Okawa Elementary School Theme Park Plan" with some dramatization, causing unrest in the community. Young people who graduated from Okawa Elementary appealed to "please leave the school," and newspapers and television reported on it extensively.

Amidst this, 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 were no particular objections at the previous meeting. If the seawall were built, it would not only worsen access to the fishermen's boat moorings but also interfere with the shrine's rituals, which had been conducted in the form of a portable shrine sea crossing since 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" (community mutual aid organizations) in the Kamaya and Nagatsura settlements. While the people of the Okawa district had moved into temporary housing by settlement and mutual aid relationships had grown within the temporary complexes, it was decided that moving into disaster public housing would begin in stages from the fall of 2017. Regarding the Okawa Elementary school building, the mayor decided on its preservation in March 2016.

In this context, people gathering at the "Hamanasu Cafe" began to express desires such as "I want to leave the memories of the region in a tangible form" and "I want to convey that there was a life here." In January 2016, Associate Professor Osamu Tsukihashi of Kobe University, who leads the "'Lost Homes' Model Restoration Project" creating 1/500 scale models of areas along the Sanriku coast, visited and met with Representative Ogawa of Nagatsura-ura Unabito and District Head Ryosuke Abe of Kamaya. Resident volunteers and people from the region 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.

Model workshops continued thereafter during Obon and other times, and at the end of 2018, a record collection of "mutterings" of memories titled "Memories of the Okawa District Hometown" (General Incorporated Association Nagatsura-ura Unabito) was published. With the cooperation of Associate Professor Hidenori Watanabe of Tokyo Metropolitan University (at the time, now a Professor at the University of Tokyo), a digital archive and AR app were also created. The residents' memories include many warm episodes, such as relationships with rich nature like gathering shijimi clams and sledding, connections with people, and memories at the 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 plan)" began to be heard again. In terms of places to maintain regional connections and the sharing of narratives, it is becoming difficult to maintain rituals and community organizations due to aging and population outflow. Amidst this, 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 for Okawa district residents in April, June, and September of 2011. 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, there was no way to answer questions like 'Do you want to cultivate rice fields?'"

Most municipalities affected by the Great East Japan Earthquake formulated 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 a sense of 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 underwent a wide-area merger with Ishinomaki City in 2005. The number of staff at the Kahoku General Branch, who deal directly with residents, had decreased 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 of the disaster. 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 for the elderly. In the housing complexes where people relocated, 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 COVID-19 pandemic.

Once a reconstruction project is decided, it is difficult to change course. That is precisely 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 participation is greater 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. While there are reconstruction funds for the Great East Japan Earthquake, they are managed by municipalities and have changed in nature. There is also regional support from university laboratories and others, 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 vision for the region's future 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 ties from before the disaster, the human network gained depth 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 recommend seawall construction based on uniform standards, "public-private partnership" measures that prioritize speed by treating model-room-like "reconstruction" images as success stories, and migration promotion or sixth-sector industrialization projects that feel like grafting a bamboo shoot onto a tree. 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 mechanism to translate the reconstruction system, encourage dialogue between people in different positions, and allow 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 become working adults. Reconstruction will continue. I want to continue watching over the progress of the people.