Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper discusses an institutional framework and inter‐governmental relationships pertaining to crisis management in Japan. While the current law shifts most responsibility to local governments, the compartmentalized and fragmented nature of the central government and a lack of viable organization therein to oversee crisis management, hinder decisive and responsive action. Crisis management is inherently local in nature and numerous examples from the local level highlight this nature of crisis management. Three features of crisis management are identified: the decentralized nature of centralized government and centralized leadership in local government, fused inter‐governmental relationship and lack of political authority.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shun’ichi Furukawa (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: