Activities

In the CAMPUS Asia Plus Program, students are offered opportunities to deepen their practical learning through collaboration with international organizations and practitioner-led seminars. In the Fall semester of 2025, as part of the course Risk Management II at the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies (GSICS), students visited the Disaster Reduction and Human Renovation Institution (DRI)* for a field trip on “Lessons from the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake and Community Disaster Preparedness and Resilience.” Below are comments from the participants.

* A facility that conveys the experiences and lessons of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, allowing visitors to learn about disaster prevention and mitigation through video exhibits, artifacts, and eyewitness accounts.

Chang Tzuyin （Taiwan）
Coming from Taiwan, I used to think I had a solid understanding of earthquakes just because I grew up around them. But the DRI visit made me realize how much I had confused “being used to shaking” with actually understanding seismic risk. The 2024 Hualien 403 earthquake showed this clearly—several northern and southern cities experienced strong shaking, yet many residents received no national alert. Later inspections revealed hidden structural problems in older buildings, and public discussion quickly shifted toward questions of preparedness and government responsibility.
After walking through DRI, I realized that the simulation—despite how intense it felt—teaches the least about what really turns earthquakes into disasters. What stayed with me were the quieter displays showing how infrastructure failed, how information didn’t reach everyone, and how community networks had to fill the gaps left by institutions. Those details felt familiar. They made me think about how easily both Japan and Taiwan normalize risk until a major event suddenly exposes what has been ignored.
This fieldtrip helped me see disaster memory differently. Remembering past earthquakes shouldn’t only be about recalling fear or destruction; it should push us to recognize the vulnerabilities we live with every day. Old buildings we assume are safe, warning systems we trust without question, and the tendency to think “it won’t happen here”—these habits are themselves forms of risk. The museum reminded me that earthquakes are natural, but the scale of disaster is shaped by human decisions. And whether society truly learns from past events depends on whether we confront the vulnerabilities we’ve allowed to accumulate long before the ground moves again.

Yun Yunsang （South Korea）
This visit changed how I understand disasters. I mainly thought earthquakes were just natural events that happen suddenly. However, the ＤＲＩ made me realize that the biggest damage often comes from secondary problems which can be like the collapse of medical services, the long-term loss of homes, and the emotional pain of losing family members. As an international student living in Japan, I also thought about what I would do in such a situation, where I would go, and who I could rely on. This experience helped me understand that resilience is not only about physical preparation but also about community support and mental strength.

Malychanh Sourideth （Laos）
Visiting to the DRI museum helped me understand that disasters are not only natural events, but also signs of problems with systems and buildings. I learned how important it is to regularly get ready, build stronger community relationships, and not depend only on help from the government. The DRI showed me how disaster memory can be used to teach people to be strong and to keep themselves safe. I learned that Recovery isn’t just about being safe physically, but also about working together as a group, taking roles being responsible, and always learning. The visit made me even more clear that education is one of the most important ways to make society better and decrease the risk of disasters.

Yao Junyu （China）
This visit changed my understanding of disaster risk. Before the visit, I thought risk mainly meant physical danger and emergency response. After seeing the exhibition, especially the temporary housing section, I realized that risk continues in everyday life, even long after the earthquake ends.　The photos and panels about loneliness, neighbor problems, and long-term　housing insecurity strongly connected with me. I learned that social relationships and community support are very important forms of disaster risk reduction. This fieldtrip helped me understand that disaster museums are not only places to remember the past, but also places to think about how we should live together and prepare for future risks.

Hitesh （India）
The museum shows that the disaster is much more than just an earthquake.  It is an event that reveals the hidden problems, or vulnerabilities in our society such as weak buildings and people living alone. Also, it highlights golden 72 hours which means that we must all be ready with emergency kits and know our neighbors because they are the first people who can help. It also highlights the privacy risks and social risk of separation specially for the disabled persons. Overall, the museum’s message is hopeful by keeping these memories alive and working together in our community (Self-Help and Mutual Aid). Also, the museum shows that the bigger disaster can come so we need to continuously improve ourselves from learning from the previous disaster as we often forget the disaster memories.