Overview of Harvard’s Inaugural Fukushima Field Trip Course

Abstract

The Fukushima Field Trip Course (Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, GHP549, Winter Session 2025) offered a unique educational experience for 15 graduate students from various disciplines at Harvard University, to examine ongoing recovery challenges in Fukushima following Japan’s 2011 triple disaster, which included a massive earthquake with powerful aftershocks, a tsunami, and explosive meltdowns at a coastal nuclear power plant. The course included interactions with diverse stakeholders in Fukushima and Tokyo and site visits to foster a comprehensive understanding. Organized into three groups (Health Monitoring, Risk Communication, and Environmental Decontamination), students presented their reports and results at Fukushima Medical University on January 21, 2025. The Health Monitoring group recommended enhancing the Fukushima Health Management Survey through community engagement, mixed-method approaches, and integrated data systems. The Risk Communication group proposed a national 15th anniversary campaign to revise and renew public perceptions of Fukushima in Japan and abroad. The Environmental Decontamination group suggested leveraging international solidarity to create a global network around reconstruction after disasters and promoting “Hope Tourism.” The course is designed to connect Fukushima with the world and prepare future leaders in community rebuilding after major crises.

Introduction

The Fukushima Field Trip Course is an innovative, credit-bearing course for graduate students at Harvard University, launched during the 2025 winter term by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The course attracted a diverse cohort of 15 participants, including master’s and PhD students from the Chan School, as well as graduate students from the Harvard School of Education and the Harvard School of Design. This report briefly introduces the course and summarizes the final presentations by students.

Fukushima gained global attention following the Great East Japan Earthquake of March 11, 2011, part of a triple disaster:the massive earthquake, a devastating tsunami, and a tragic accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. Thirteen years later, many challenges persist, including the disposition of contaminated radioactive materials and the spread of harmful rumors about Fukushima, often referred to as the fourth disaster. Throughout the course, students explored community reconstruction using the “Build Back Better” initiative, which was first presented in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction¹⁾. Students examined firsthand the lived experiences of residents in dealing with both past and present issues related to the “Build Back Better” concept. This framework emphasizes the social dimensions of rebuilding, such as empowering local authorities and communities and ensuring inclusive decision-making, which were focal points for discussion and investigation during the field trip.

Before the field trip, students had preparatory sessions introducing them to damage caused by the disaster and the Japan Disaster Archive, then presented their group project suggestions, and received feedback from Osaka University students who had attended a similar course. In the first week, the course concentrated on past challenges and measures implemented to address them. Participants attended lectures from diverse stakeholders, including representatives from Fukushima City’s municipal government, city health center staff, university professors, an NGO, a former local school principal, and a politician. The curriculum was enriched by site visits to municipal government offices, the city health center, the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, the Tokyo Electric Power Company Decommissioning Archive Center, and the Great East Japan Earthquake and Nuclear Disaster Memorial Museum. The second week’s focus shifted toward future prospects for Fukushima. Students traveled to Aizu-Wakamatsu City to engage with local communities and gain insights into community-building initiatives. They visited a hospital, a school, and local businesses, engaging directly with residents to discuss their perspectives on community development. In the final week, course participants returned to Fukushima City to present their findings, and then moved to Tokyo to explore public health research institutes and organizations. This segment included a visit to the National Diet Building for a meeting with Senator Keizo Takemi, former Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare.

During the course, students were organized into three groups:Risk Communication, Health Monitoring, and Environmental Decontamination. The groups developed “Build Back Better” strategies for their final presentations, which took place at Fukushima Medical University on January 21, 2025. This event was open to course collaborators and the university’s students, faculty, and healthcare professionals from the university medical center, among whom about 50 attended. Each group received feedback and comments on their strategies from the audience, facilitating a valuable exchange of insights. The course also received local newspaper coverage from Fukushima Minpo and Fukushima Minyu Shimbun.

Grading in this course reflected student preparation, active participation in lectures and site visits, and collaborative work on their group projects. These projects−including teamwork, a final presentation, and a written report−were at the core of the course and served as the primary means for students to demonstrate their understanding and application of what they learned throughout the program. Below are the student summaries of their presentations.

Recommendations to adapt the Mental Health and Lifestyle Survey to enhance its utility, accessibility, and relevance within Fukushima Prefecture (Health Monitoring group)

The Mental Health and Lifestyle Survey, commissioned by Fukushima Prefecture in 2012 and conducted by Fukushima Medical University (FMU), is part of the Fukushima Health Management Survey (FHMS)²⁾. The survey’s goal is to monitor health issues arising from prolonged evacuation following the 2011 Fukushima disaster. This annual mail-based survey targeted approximately 210,000 residents from designated evacuation zones, aiming to facilitate timely interventions through telephone support²⁾. While survey findings indicated persistently high mental health risks among the residents despite some improvements, long-term participation had been hindered by research fatigue and survey burden. To address these challenges, the Health Monitoring group proposed three strategies to enhance the long-term utility, accessibility, and impact of the Mental Health and Lifestyle Survey.

First, the group suggested that strengthening community participation could help keep the survey relevant and trusted. To capture diverse perspectives and reduce participation fatigue, students proposed focus groups with vulnerable populations, including displaced individuals, school-aged children, foreign residents, and nuclear facility workers. Engaging these groups in survey design could ensure that their voices are heard and their lived experiences are valued. Moreover, collaboration with community leaders and local organizations could strengthen communication and build trust. Schools also served as critical settings for mental health monitoring. The Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) framework would offer structured interventions at different levels of need³⁾. Training teachers and counselors in mental health support could improve early stress detection and intervention, and foster a proactive and supportive environment.

Second, a mixed-methods approach was recommended to improve the survey’s comprehensiveness⁴⁾. Reliance on closed-ended, radiation-specific questions risks priming responses and limiting insight into broader mental health concerns. Expanding the survey focus to include diverse mental health themes and qualitative responses could provide a clearer picture of community well-being. To ensure continued relevance, the survey could broaden its scope to include economic stability, family safety, and community rebuilding. Open-ended prompts would allow residents to express concerns beyond radiation-related anxieties, providing valuable input for policymakers. Additionally, currently implemented standardized tools, such as the Kessler 6-Item Psychological Distress Scale⁵⁾, could be supplemented with qualitative narratives to enhance data richness.

Third, integrating FHMS data into national health systems could strengthen individual and population-level health monitoring. This integration could improve continuity of care, support preventative measures, and inform evidence-based policies. Linking FHMS data with national health databases could further strengthen public health responses and optimize data-driven decision-making. Standardizing FHMS data would facilitate its incorporation into electronic medical records, supporting Japan’s digital healthcare transition. However, successful integration would necessitate strong policy-level commitments to privacy, ethical data use, and accessibility. Expanding digital platforms and mobile applications for survey participation could also provide interactive tools, reminders, and real-time feedback to encourage long-term participation.

By strengthening community participation, broadening mental health support, and integrating data into national health systems, the Health Monitoring group aimed to develop a proactive model for disaster health management in Japan. These efforts would help build a more resilient, adaptive, and community-centered public health system in Fukushima and beyond.

From Stigma to Strength:Revitalizing Fukushima 15 Years Later (Risk Communication group)

Fukushima Prefecture faces a “fourth disaster” of persistent stigma and rumors following the 2011 disasters. While Fukushima has a rich cultural heritage and natural beauty, and has been successfully rebuilt with thorough radiation monitoring and decontamination, misperceptions from people outside Fukushima persist. With 2026 marking the 15th anniversary of the disaster, this group sees an opportunity to reshape public perceptions through a nationwide communication campaign:“From Stigma to Strength.”

The campaign, as proposed, should target Japanese people outside of Fukushima. Hirai et al. showed that Japanese people have diverse views and levels of information on the 2011 disaster, especially radiation risks⁶⁾. Therefore, identifying personas based on factors like demographics, concerns, lived experiences, and trusted information sources is crucial to success. In addition to utilizing diverse media to combat “fake news” in today’s post-truth world⁷⁾, the group approaches risk communication as a cultural problem, not just a scientific one, to combat sticky perceptions of Fukushima as irradiated. The proposed campaign seeks to weave a new narrative about Fukushima.

The 15th Commemorative Campaign “From Stigma to Strength” celebrates Fukushima’s resilience and aims to reshape its narrative through three interconnected lenses:health and science, disaster preparedness, and culture and innovation. Utilizing COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behavior) and Behavior Change Wheel frameworks⁸⁾, the group developed main events and long-term programs. Main events include radiation education, movie screenings, storytelling sessions, art and cultural events, and farmers’ markets with tasting events. Long-term programs include serving Fukushima products at official events, hosting official events in the region, community-inclusive events, free visa promotions, simplifying domestic migration and return processes, and advancing disaster preparedness and innovation.

The group conducted a stakeholder analysis for the campaign that uses academic tools to elevate the concerns of women, children, parents, and local activists. Utilizing the Power-Interest Grid⁹⁾, we identified key groups and updated the grid for greater inclusivity. The GU-GU-RU Project¹⁰⁾, Dr. Michael Reich’s PolicyMaker software, and Dr. Aya Goto’s work on health literacy post-Fukushima¹¹⁾ informed strategies to combat stigma, promote resilience, and engage marginalized voices. Incorporating risk communication and nudge theory, the group proposed actions to foster trust and support sustainable recovery aligned with “Build Back Better” principles.

To assess the effectiveness of the communication strategy and inform future policymaking and program design, the group proposes a comprehensive monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework. This framework includes metrics across five stages−input, process, output, outcome, and long-term impact−focusing on campaign performance, shifts in public perception, and broader economic and social effects. Data will be collected through qualitative methods (e.g., focus groups, structured interviews), quantitative surveys, and big data analysis (e.g., social media mining). Pre- and post-tests will ensure data-driven evaluation and continuous refinement. By dispelling stigma through the campaign, the group hopes to stimulate the rebuilding of the community and workforce in Fukushima. The key takeaway here is that the group’s goal of dispelling stigma and stimulating revitalization is not the end-state, but merely a means to a broader end:to enable residents and evacuees to live healthy, fulfilling lives in sustainable harmony with Planet Earth.

Reclaiming the legacy of Fukushima (Environmental group)

To recognize the many stories and evolving needs of Fukushima in its recovery process, the “Environmental Decontamination” group renamed itself as the “Environmental” group, focusing on how the region’s environmental future exists beyond imagining “contamination.” The Environmental group suggests reclaiming the legacy of Fukushima in a way that highlights these efforts. The group recognizes that their proposal emphasizes future revitalization rather than explicitly protecting and uplifting the lives that were forever impacted by the triple disaster and ongoing evacuation mandate. Two initiatives are offered, aimed at solidifying the success of Fukushima’s recovery while acknowledging its ongoing challenges.

First, the group suggests fostering international solidarity by connecting local leaders in Fukushima with those from other disaster-affected regions. This proposal creates a global network connecting local leaders in vulnerable communities with those who led Fukushima’s recovery. By creating direct connections between local leaders in Fukushima and those from disaster-stricken communities all around the globe, the network can foster a powerful exchange of knowledge and strategies. Grassroots leaders, including teachers and community organizers, will collaborate with Fukushima’s elected officials and take on specific roles as advisors. They can provide hands-on training on disaster preparedness techniques, such as developing evacuation plans, managing community shelters, and providing mentorship after disasters. This effort aims to leverage existing networks such as the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), members of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, the Harvard School of Public Health Takemi Fellows, local universities, and public nominees to identify recovery leaders to serve in these roles. Disasters transcend borders, and so must the response. By fostering a network of resilient communities that learn from each other’s experiences, this effort can begin to address universal disaster recovery challenges with localized, effective solutions, while building a foundation of solidarity and shared strength across global communities¹²⁾.

Second, continuing with the theme of framing Fukushima as a model, the group suggests expanding on existing “Hope Tourism” in the prefecture by encouraging micro-influencer collaboration¹³⁾. This collaboration would include subsidized visits and thoughtful itineraries for visits to all three regions in Fukushima Prefecture, with the stipulation that online content about the prefecture be created. Visits would incorporate new and existing experiential programs curated by local stakeholders. A range of programs for the influencers to include in their content would be necessary to ensure that visits incorporate the range of views from Fukushima, including those who want to move forward and those who wish to recover what was lost. By following an influencer’s personal life and tastes over time, audience members can feel like the creator is their real-life friend. Content made by these influencers then comes across as trusted, personal advice. Engagement and trust reinforce learning in a traditional educational setting and could be applied to further information dissemination.

The group hopes that the proposal can serve as a step in the right direction for dispelling the single story of a post-triple disaster Fukushima and open a path for many stories of Fukushima to be told all over Japan and the world¹⁴⁾.

Fig 1.

Final presentation day at Fukushima Medical University

Conclusion

The students’ perspectives on their learning throughout Harvard’s Fukushima Field Trip Course suggest they are becoming ambassadors for Fukushima, informing people worldwide about the region’s recovery and rebuilding. In addition to their final presentations at Fukushima Medical University, the students reported their achievements at an online seminar co-organized by the Health and Global Policy Institute and the Takemi Program in International Health, which was open to a wider audience. Here are the testimonies of two representative students.

“Learning about Fukushima has reaffirmed the importance of understanding a single issue from different perspectives and seeing things through the eyes of people from different backgrounds. In addition, during this course, I had the opportunity to hear directly not only from university researchers, but also from representatives of Fukushima-based nonprofit organizations, school teachers, and politicians. This experience allowed me to reflect on how research can be connected to the lives of people in the community. I would like to incorporate what I learned into my future research.”

“The course has been thoughtfully curated, and has given us the opportunity to learn from a diverse set of stakeholders to whom we would otherwise not have had access. We’re excited to apply the rich academic and cultural lessons learned to our future careers, and we’ll be bringing back with us a nuanced perspective on what it truly means to Build Back Better.”

University President Seiichi Takenoshita opened Fukushima Medical University’s annual International Symposium on the Fukushima Health Management Survey (February 20, 2025) with a message that it is time to pass lessons learned to the next generation, citing the Harvard course as an example of this initiative. Planning is underway for the next Fukushima Field Trip in 2026 to foster a new generation of leaders committed to sustainable development and disaster recovery. Based on feedback from this year’s students, improvements for next year’s course are being discussed, including a longer stay in the coastal area, more interaction with local residents, hands-on exercises in radiation protection, while limiting the number of lectures to avoid redundancy. Two students of this course will return to Fukushima in the summer of 2025 to continue their proposed work, and one of them is planning to work as a teaching fellow for the next course in 2026. It is expected that this positive cascade of learning, practicing, and teaching will continue among the next generation of students.

Acknowledgments

The course was hosted by Fukushima Medical University, Takeda Healthcare Foundation, and Mitsubishi Corporation (Digital Innovation Center). We thank Fukushima City, Aizu Wakamatsu City, and Fukushima Prefecture for their financial and managerial support. We also sincerely thank all lecturers, collaborators, and host families for their support.

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed herein reflect the consensus of student coauthors and do not necessarily reflect the individual opinions of faculty advisors or official policies of their institutions.

References

• 1.  The United National Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. 2015. https://www.undrr.org/publication/sendai-framework-disaster-risk-reduction-2015-2030
• 2.  Maeda M, Harigane M, Horikoshi N, et al. Long-term, community-based approach for affected people having problems with mental health and lifestyle issues after the 2011 Fukushima disaster: the Fukushima Health Management Survey. J Epidemiol, 32(Suppl_XII):S47-S56, 2022.
• 3.  August GJ, Piehler TF, Miller FG. Getting “SMART” about implementing multi-tiered systems of support to promote school mental health. J Sch Psychol, 66:85-96, 2018.
• 4.  Tariq S, Woodman J. Using mixed methods in health research. JRSM Short Rep, 4(6): 2042533313479197, 2013.
• 5.  Wojujutari AK, Idemudia ES. Consistency as the currency in psychological measures:a reliability generalization meta-analysis of Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10 and K-6). Depress Anxiety. 2024:3801950.
• 6.  Hirai K, Yamamura A, Matsumura Y, et al. Segmentation of the general public according to differences in knowledge and beliefs about radiation-cluster analysis by attitude, knowledge, belief and anxiety. J Radiat Res, 65(Supplement_1):i42-i51, 2024.
• 7.  Mitsubishi Research Institute. Yoshizawa N, Ito Y, Segawa Y., et al. Comparison of attitudes towards the earthquake disaster and reconstruction between Tokyo residents and Fukushima residents: Report on the results of the 6th survey (conducted in 2023). https://www.mri.co.jp/knowledge/column/20240306.html (In Japanese)
• 8.  Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel:a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci, 6:42, 2011.
• 9.  Brugha R, Varvasovszky Z. Stakeholder analysis: a review. Health Policy Plan, 15(3): 239-246, 2000.
• 10.  Amir I, Eguchi Y, Saotome K, et al. The “GU-GU-RU” project to eliminate discrimination related to the health effects of the Fukushima nuclear accident. BMC Public Health, 23(1):2050, 2023.
• 11.  Goto A, Lloyd Williams A, Okabe S, et al. Beyond radiation anxiety and country borders:applying health literacy in the field after the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Ann ICRP, 53(1_suppl):155-158, 2024.
• 12.  National League of Cities. Local leaders’ role before, during and after disasters. https://www.nlc.org/article/2023/09/01/local-leaders-role-before-during-and-after-disasters/
• 13.  Hope Tourism:Learning x Fukushima. Hope Tourism. (n.d.). https://www.hopetourism.jp/en/
• 14.  2020 Report on Radiological Consequences from the Fukushima Accident 10 years later (UNSCEAR, Ed.) [Review of 2020 Report on Radiological Consequences from the Fukushima Accident 10 years later]. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. 2023. https://www.unscear.org/unscear/uploads/documents/fact-sheets/2020-2021-report/2313286-FukushimaBrochure_English.pdf