Concepts and approaches of earthquake risk reduction have evolved over time. The Great Kanto Earthquake of 1923 has paved the pathway of this long journey. 1995 the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake has taught the importance of self help and mutual help in terms of community participation, volunteer activities, and role of civil society. In the first international decade of disaster risk reduction, two landmark earthquake risk reduction projects, namely risk assessment tools for diagnosis of urban areas against seismic disaster (RADIUS) and global earthquake safety initiative (GESI) have made significant impacts to scenraio-based risk assessment, and raising awareness of local governments mainly in developing countries to undertake decisive actions. The Kutch Earthquake of 2001 of India has prompted the need of owner driven reconstruction (ODR), which is considered inclusive as well as sustainable in long run. While the pre-disaster preventive measures for earthquake risks are challenging, the new complex global risk landscape poses additional challenges which need to be addressed to reposition earthquake risk reduction. It is argued that addressing systemic risks, active involvement of private sectors, role of new and emerging technologies, understanding priorities of new generation, and role of new entrepreneurship (in the form of Science-preneurship) are some of the future pathways to address the complexity of earthquake risk reduction.

1. [1] S. L. Gulick, “The Winning of the Far East – A Study of the Christian Movement in China, Korea and Japan,” George H. Doran Company. p. 15, 1923.
2. [2] C. Scawthorn, J. M. Eidinger, and A. J. Schiff, “Fire Following Earthquake,” American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006.
3. [3] J. Hunter, “Extreme confusion and disorder? The Japanese economy in the Great Kantō earthquake of 1923,” J. of Asian Studies, Vol.73, No.3, pp. 753-773, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911814000497
4. [4] D. P. Aldrich, “Social, not physical, infrastructure: The critical role of civil society after the 1923 Tokyo earthquake,” Disasters, Vol.36, No.3, pp. 398-419, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2011.01263.x
5. [5] J. Borland, “Capitalising on catastrophe: Reinvigorating the Japanese state with moral values through education following the 1923 Great Kantō Earthquake,” Modern Asian Studies, Vol.40, No.4, pp. 875-907, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X06002010
6. [6] J. Borland, “Voices of vulnerability and resilience: Children and their recollections in post-earthquake Tokyo,” Japanese Studies, Vol.36, No.3, pp. 299-317, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/10371397.2016.1246058
7. [7] J. C. Schencking, “The Great Kantō Earthquake and the culture of catastrophe and reconstruction in 1920s Japan,” J. of Japanese Studies, Vol.34, No.2, pp. 295-331, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1353/jjs.0.0021
8. [8] R. Shaw and K. Goda, “From disaster to sustainable civil society: The Kobe experiences,” Disaster, Vol.28, No.1, pp. 16-40, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0361-3666.2004.00241.x
9. [9] S. Kanbara and R. Shaw, “Disaster Risk Reduction Regime in Japan: An Analysis in the Perspective of Open Data, Open Governance,” Sustainability, Vol.14, No.1, 19, 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010019
10. [10] Y. Nakagawa and R. Shaw, “Social Capital: A missing link to disaster recovery,” Int. J. of Mass Emergency and Disaster, Vol.22, No.1, pp. 5-34, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1177/028072700402200101
11. [11] J. Hibino and R. Shaw, “Roles of community radio in disaster management: Reflections from Japan,” R. Shaw (Ed.), “Community Practices for Disaster Risk Reduction in Japan,” pp. 121-132, Springer, 2014.
12. [12] United Nations, International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), RADIUS project overview, 1997. https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/239499?ln=en [Accessed May 6, 2023]
13. [13] National Society for Earthquake Technology-Nepal, Kathmandu Valley Earthquake Risk Management Project (KVERMP), 2011. https://www.nset.org.np/nset2012/images/publicationfile/20111220133210.pdf [Accessed May 6, 2023]
14. [14] United Nations Centre for Regional Development (UNCRD), Global Earthquake Safety Initiative (GESI 2001). https://www.uncrd.or.jp/index.php?page=view&type=400&nr=147&menu=229 [Accessed May 6, 2023]
15. [15] R. Shaw, M. Kobayashi, H. Kameda, M. Gupta, A. Sharma, Y. Nakagawa, and M. Banba, “International Cooperation in the post-disaster scenario: A case study from Gujarat, India” J. for Natural Disaster Science, Vol.24, No.2, pp. 73-82, 2002.
16. [16] R. Shaw, K. Shiwaku, H. Kobayashi, and M. Kobayashi, “Linking experience, knowledge, perception and earthquake preparedness,” Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol.13, No.1, pp. 39-49, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560410521689
17. [17] J. Yoo, “A Study on the Comparative Analysis of Earthquake Prevention in Korea and Japan,” Graduation Thesis, Keio University, 2018.
18. [18] World Economic Forum “The Global Risk Report 2020,” World Economic Forum, Global Risk Report, 15th Editon, pp. 1-102, 2020.
19. [19] World Economic Forum “The Global Risk Report 2021,” World Economic Forum, Global Risk Report, 16th Editon, pp. 1-97, 2021.
20. [20] World Economic Forum, “The Global Risk Report 2022,” World Economic Forum, Global Risk Report, 17th Editon, pp. 1-117, 2022.
21. [21] World Economic Forum, “WEF 2023 Global Risk Report 2023,” World Economic Forum, 18th Editon, pp. 1-98, 2023.
22. [22] M. S. Ahmed, T. Sarmah, A. Dabral, R. Chatterjee, and R. Shaw, “Unpacking systemic, cascading, and compound risks: A case based analysis of Asia Pacific,” Progress in Disaster Science, Vol.18, Article No.100285, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2023.100285
23. [23] S. Bajwa, A. Dabral, R. Chatterjee, and R. Shaw, “Co-Producing Knowledge Innovation Through Thematic Incubators for Disaster Risk Reduction and Sustainable Development in India,” Sustainability, Vol.13, No.4, 2044, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042044
24. [24] A. Dabral, S. Bajwa, S. Shioyama, R. Chatterjee, and R. Shaw, “Social innovation hackathon for driving innovation in disaster risk reduction (DRR),” J. of Integrated Disaster Risk Management (IDRiM), Vol.11, No.1, pp. 64-82, 2021. https://doi.org/10.5595/001c.28876