Photo/Illutration The municipal housing complex in Futaba, Fukushima Prefecture, is located to the right of JR Futaba Station, center. (Takeshi Komiya)

FUTABA, Fukushima Prefecture—Two-and-a-half years after evacuation orders were lifted in parts of Futaba, the municipal government is focused on attracting new residents to revitalize the community.

But progress has been slow so far in the town located northwest of the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.

The population of Futaba remains at around 180, or 3 percent of the level before the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami caused the triple meltdown at the plant.

And although Futaba became the last of 12 municipalities in the prefecture to have its evacuation order lifted on Aug. 30, 2022, only 15 percent of the town’s 51.4 square kilometers is habitable, highlighting the sluggish pace of recovery.

A special provision allows people who evacuated to other areas to maintain their Futaba residency. Therefore, about 5,300 people, or 97 percent of the town’s current official population, are not actually residing in Futaba. 

Many of them are unlikely to return soon, as they have settled into new communities or are too elderly to move back.

Faced with this challenge, Futaba has constructed municipal housing and is planning a compact town centered around JR Futaba Station to welcome newcomers.

Mayor Shiro Izawa envisions a town of 2,000 residents by 2030, with a focus on young entrepreneurs.

COMMUTE TO SCHOOL NEXT TOWN

Yuko Takakuda, 49, is from Iwaki, located about 50 kilometers south of Futaba. She moved to Futaba with her two teenage children to be closer to her job in a neighboring town.

“The child-rearing environment is important,” she says.

Currently, 13 children of elementary school age and younger live in Futaba, most of whom commute to a school in a neighboring town.

After school, there are few places in the Futaba neighborhood for children to play. Recently, a group of 11 parents living in municipal housing petitioned the town assembly for playground equipment.

Tatsuhiro Yamane, 39, a town assembly member who moved from Tokyo and married a local woman, is raising three children in Futaba.

“I’m dedicated to promoting Futaba and laying the groundwork for the town to thrive for the next 100 years,” Yamane said.

A recent Asahi Shimbun survey of 81 households with 108 newcomers to Futaba received valid responses from 20 households with 37 individuals.

Seven households moved to the town from within Fukushima Prefecture, while 13 households came from other regions, including Tokyo, Hokkaido and Nara Prefecture.

The most common reason for moving to Futaba was to support reconstruction of the disaster-hit area, cited by six households. Five households relocated for work, while four were attracted by the local nature and environment.

SHOPPING, JOBS AMONG MAJOR CHALLENGES

The survey also highlighted the challenges facing new residents. The town lacks a supermarket, so many residents must drive to neighboring municipalities for groceries.

Job opportunities are also limited within Futaba.

And although a clinic operates near the train station, it only offers internal medicine and is open just a few days a week.

When asked about the challenges of living in Futaba, 14 households cited the lack of shopping options, 11 mentioned the scarcity of job opportunities and 10 expressed the need for more medical and welfare services, according to the survey.

Nine households said the child-rearing environment needs improvement, and another nine expressed a desire for the complete lifting of evacuation orders across the town.

Fukushima Prefecture offers a 2-million-yen ($13,300) subsidy to families from outside the prefecture who live in Futaba for more than five years.

The survey found that 13 households planned to stay for more than five years, while six households were unsure.

Fourteen households consisted of single individuals, two households had two members and four households had three or more members, the survey found.

The respondents included eight males, 11 females, and one person who did not specify gender.

The age distribution of respondents was: seven in their 50s; four each in their 30s and 60s; three in their 40s; and two in their 70s or older.