The “fallacy of composition” as an ethical challenge facing scientific research in disaster-affected areas: The 2024 Noto Peninsula Earthquake and Tsunami

Abstract

Research surveys in disaster-affected areas always conflict between providing important information and recommendations regarding the actual status of damage, recovery, and reconstruction and, contrastingly, the need for more careful ethical considerations. It has been reported that the 2004 Aceh Tsunami and the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, certain research activities caused difficulties for afflicted people and affected areas. The above can be divided into two main categories: the problem of the capacity, burden, and exhaustion of the research subjects and the ethical issue related to the methods, content, and approach of individual studies. However, the former analysis of solutions remains almost completely unaddressed in disaster science. Thus, this study considered how academia should behave, collaborate, and coordinate through the case of Japan in 2024. As a result, while Japan has a comprehensive federation of researchers and academic societies, coordinating the research activities has been challenging. This difficulty stems from the federation’s lack of authority to control academic societies and researchers, lack of consensus building regarding the “fallacy of composition” in disaster science, and the involvement of numerous stakeholders. The plethora of research opportunities and the various grants have been identified as risk factors contributing to project fragmentation and research duplication. It was suggested that questions could improve the composition of grant reviews to prevent research duplication and the depletion of subject areas. Furthermore, it is crucial to pre-determine which university or institution would take the lead when a disaster occurs in each region.