Japan suffered devastating losses in the Second World War, not only loss of human life, but
significant damage and loss regarding the infrastructure of cities. Planning through the 1940s and
1950s in Japan hardly adapted to relieve the stress of housing shortages and damage to
infrastructure. Hiroshima is a very interesting case that shows how pre-war and post-war planning
can remain consistent, even after massive scale disasters. Tokyo also sustained extensive damage
and losses of life throughout the War, with a huge increase in the urban population after the war
making the housing shortage even more severe. “In 1944-45 there was the destruction of more
than 2 million houses by bombing, and of another half-million by the authorities to make fire breaks
in densely populated areas” (Dore, 1958). The air raids performed by the allied forces heavily
exacerbated the housing and planing issues that already existed before the war.
A major part of the city of Hiroshima was destroyed after it fell victim to the first atomic bomb that
was ever dropped on a city in August 1945. Many other Japanese cities were also destroyed as a
result of bombings, however Hiroshima saw the most significant damage. About 60,000 houses
were damaged, which was approximately 80 per cent of the previously 76,000 homes in the city
(Norioki, 2003). As shown in Figure 2, the city was turned to dust after the bombing, with only a few
concrete structures remaining. Proposals for large scale reconstruction came fairly quickly after the
disaster, with citizens submitting plans along with the planning officials. However due to financial
constraints, only the plans from official planners ended up being realised. This meant that there
was consistency in planning from the pre-war city to the post-war city, an example of this is the
original grid pattern from the City Planning Act of 1919 (Norioki, 2003) being included in the plan
for the ‘new city’. An issue with the post-war planning of the city was that the planners decided to
focus on “streets, parks and land uses” (Norioki, 2003), rather than the problem of the loss of
housing. More than 60,000 people were killed instantly by the blast, and around 140,000 passed
away by December 1945, this left the city struggling fiscally as it had lost around 80 per cent of its
tax base (Norioki, 2003). Tokyo also suffered from bombing raids, in a single raid on the city in
March, 83,000 people were killed (Taylor, 1998). There was a lot of talk about the future population
of Hiroshima at the time, it was expected to reach a small size of 100,000 to 500,000, however this
was surpassed in 1960 (Norioki,2003).
Figure 1. Nuclear Cloud over Hiroshima, 6 August, 1945. (Meyer, 2012)
The initial rebuilding of the city was approved in October/November of 1946. A key part of the plan
was to have a 100 metre wide street running across the middle of the city from east to west
(Norioki, 2003). This may have been inspired by the work of European planner Georges
Haussmann, who believed in large boulevards leading to a central space or building (Van Zanten,
1994). Furthermore, the planners of Hiroshima used a strategy called ‘Land Readjustment,’ where
by people were displaced to other parts of the city so landmarks such as the 100 metre wide road
could be built. This is not dissimilar to Haussmann, who in the transformation of Paris demolished
buildings and houses, displacing thousands of people (Van Zanten, 1994). The devastation in
Hiroshima was particularly high, however other Japanese cities such as Tokyo also received heavy
damage from air raids (As shown in Figure 3).
During the 1930s Tokyo went through a period of rapid population growth, as well as a time of
great political unrest, with pressure growing towards a formal war with China (Calvocoressi, Wint,
& Pritchard, 1999). Many Japanese people thought the Nazi policy “Lebensraum” (‘room to live’)
was the way to move forward. The ‘room to live’ was linked to the argument that there were only
three ways to ease the pressure of the growing population, these being: emigration, advancing to
world markets, and territorial expansion. Japan was left with no option but the third, further pushing
them towards war with China (Henshall, 2004). The war took away resources that needed to be put
into the housing shortage, with an inadequacy of accommodation for industrial workers quickly
becoming acute (Dore, 1958). There was already an issue with housing before the war, meaning
after the loss of a sixth of the nation’s houses (Dore, 1958), there was a dire need for more
housing, especially in factory districts. By May 1952, “more than half the houses in Tokyo were
post-war, but even then the number of houses in Tokyo was only 76% of estimated minimum
requirements” (Dore, 1958). The population of Tokyo had swelled from 2,780,000 to 5,390,000 only
five years after the end of the war, almost doubling in size (Hein, Diefendorf, & Ishida, 2003). This
caused overcrowding of houses and apartments, significantly lowering the living standards for
residents on urban areas. The complete lack of housing in Tokyo and many other Japanese cities
pre and post World War Two was a clear problem, it was up to planners to resolve the issue,
however in the years following the war this never really happened.
Figure 2. Aftermath from the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, 6
August 1945.
("Hiroshima: aftermath of the atomic bomb -- Kids Encyclopedia | Children's
Homework Help | Kids Online Dictionary | Britannica," n.d.)
Urban planning in Japan in the 20th century, and in particular after the conclusion of the Second
World War, was mainly focused around the reconstruction and development of land use, streets
and parks. This resulted in not enough focus being placed on building residences for the growing
population. The destruction was particularly evident in Hiroshima and the capital, Tokyo, with both
cities experiencing extensive bombing damage. The country as a whole was burdened with a huge
housing shortage of 4,200,000 units, as the government was left with the job of providing houses
for occupation forces, as well as Japanese residents (Hein, Diefendorf & Ishida, 2003). The cities
were rebuilt, with inspiration coming from European planners such as Haussmann. Both Hiroshima
and Tokyo were re-built relatively quickly, however it is clear that the reconstruction of Tokyo did not
follow any carefully thought out plan (Hein, Diefendorf & Ishida, 2003). Where as Hiroshima, as
presented by Horioki (2003), was reconstructed by city planners, who attempted to rebuild the city
to have a similar layout as it did before the war. Planning in Japan adapted and developed,
becoming slightly more westernised, primarily due to the loss of the Second World War.
Figure 3. Areas destroyed by air raids in the wards of Tokyo. (Hein,
Diefendorf & Ishida, 2003)
REFERENCES:
Calvocoressi, P., Wint, G., & Pritchard, R. J. (1999). The Penguin history of the Second World War.
London: Penguin.
Dore, R. P. (1958). Houses and Apartment Blocks. In City Life in Japan: A Study of a Tokyo Ward
(pp. 40-52). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Hein, C., Diefendorf, J. M., & Ishida, Y. (2003). Rebuilding urban Japan after 1945. Houndmills,
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Henshall, K. (2004). A History of Japan, 2nd Edition. Retrieved from http://
www.palgraveconnect.com/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9780230502925
Hiroshima: aftermath of the atomic bomb -- Kids Encyclopedia | Children's Homework Help | Kids
Online Dictionary | Britannica. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://kids.britannica.com/comptons/art-92126/
Total-destruction-of-Hiroshima-Japan-following-the-dropping-of-the
Meyer, M. W. (2012). Japan: A Concise History. Retrieved from http://www.eblib.com
Norioki, I. (2003). Reconstructing Hiroshima and Preserving the Reconstructed City. In C. Hein, J.
M. Diefendorf, & Y. Ishida (Eds.), Rebuilding Urban Japan After 1945 (pp. 87-107). London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Taylor, A. J. (1998). The Second World War and its Aftermath. London: The Folio Society.
Van Zanten, D. (1994). Haussman, Baltard and Municipal Architecture. In Building Paris:
Architectural Institutions and the Transformation of the French Capital (pp. 198-213). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment