The Roles and Tasks of Implementation Science on Disaster Prevention and Reduction Knowledge and Technology: From Efficient Application to Collaborative Generation

Abstract

Implementation science should be developed and implemented in a scientific manner. Because implementation deals with how well scientific knowledge is implemented in an arena in which more diverse stakeholders rather than only limited number of scientists join, knowledge of implementation science by itself should be developed in a more dialogical and more discursive way. In other words, implementation science is a process to (re-)co-construct knowledge networks in which multiple locally and/or temporarily "viable solutions" co-exist and are mutually interlinked, rather than a process to identify universally "correct solutions" exclusively by scientists. Thus, we need to create a new-type of communication medium by which people can see a society, not as a world where a single "correct solution" is specified by privileged persons, such as a professional scientist, an influential politician, or an talented administrative government officer, for example, but as a debatable, conflicting, and dilemmatic world, and thus, a world where multiple "viable solutions" can coexist. Crossroad Game, a disaster prevention game developed by the author, and Rain Project, a participatory effort for meteorological information sharing that have been developed by Weathernews, Inc., are introduced as two actual case examples of implementation science for disaster risk management.

Insights on social learning and collaborative action plan development for disaster risk reduction: practicing Yonmenkaigi System Method (YSM) in flood-prone Mumbai

“…Although recent decades have seen an increasing recognition among researchers, planners, and practitioners in the need to foster participatory disaster risk management (Chen et al 2006;Shaw et al 2009), studies show that it is not always easy to integrate public participation and disaster management and the involvement of communities in disaster management, thus remains elusive (Yamori 2011;Pelling 2007). Moreover, questions about the best structure and procedures for participation and the public's role in authority over planning have been controversial (Rowe and Frewer 2000;Renn et al 1993).…”

“…In spite of their contributions to sustainable disaster management, they have several limitations (Yamori 2011;Okada et al 2013;Na et al 2009). Most of these interactive learning and knowledge development processes retain the idea that knowledge and plans should be generated solely by disaster prevention and reduction authorities and experts (Yamori 2009).…”

“…Still at higher levels, members of the community may be selected to take part in exercises meant to provide them with some decision-making authority. To this end, many techniques have been developed to allow communities to gain knowledge and skills concerning disaster prevention and reduction using participatory, voluntary, and interactive methods such as workshops, disaster games, and disaster preventive maps created through town walking (Yamori 2011;Na et al 2010;Bajek et al 2008;Cronin et al 2004). In disaster risk reduction plan implementation processes that use these techniques, the characteristics and culture of each community are emphasized, as occurs in communitybased disaster management, or ''CBDM'' (e.g., Shaw et al 2009), and participatory disaster risk management, or ''PDRM'' (e.g., Bajek et al 2008).…”