Citation

Kobayashi T, Takebayashi Y, Murakami M. Nature 2020; 579(7798): 193.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1038/d41586-020-00696-z

PMID

32157234

Abstract

In our experience, the recovery of disaster zones can be improved by providing research feedback to affected communities (see J. C. Gaillard and L. Peek Nature 575, 440–442; 2019).

In 2017, we questioned communities that had been evacuated following the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan. We asked them about their awareness of the risks of living in the region and the factors that had been important for recovery. We then fed our results back to them — much to their surprise, because we were the first researchers ever to have done so. These communities knew nothing about the 20,000 publications related to the disaster.

In our view, this remoteness of researchers from those affected by such catastrophes needs to be corrected. It could stem from mere oversight or from a reluctance to sacrifice time that might otherwise be spent writing papers or grant applications. However, meetings with local communities before and after data collection are ethical and productive. Furthermore ...

Language: en

Keywords

Ethics; Research management; Society