Abstract
Inadequacy, irrelevance, and deficits in risk governance are observed in the adverse impacts or inexpediencies arisen secondarily from rebuilding planning and practices beyond huge disaster damages of the 3.11. The author, using the policy guide of IRGC(International Risk Governance Council, 2009) for more efficient, transparent, equitable risk governance, reviews and appraises the target setting, option design, decisionmaking, and implementation of rebuilding actions in Sanriku and Fukushima communities by government sectors. The practitioners seem to fail to understand social cost of single-cut symbolic projects and be liable to continue working those such as in community relocation to uplands far from fishery operation sites, reconstruction of coastal levee system with higher level but without more resiliency, decontamination of community environment polluted by radiation and so on. There are many lessons concerning deficits in the 3.11 case which should be tackled by suitable actions for better risk governance, introduced in the IRGC guide, in which IRGC has pointed out the relevant actions of responding to early-warning, designing effective and equitable risk management strategy, preparing reasonable range of policy alternatives, and implementing policies with developed tools and capacities for good risk management.
