‘Disaster education’ has been studied in various disciplines such as disaster risk management and environmental studies. However, disaster education is a relatively ‘new enquiry’ in the field of education. Particularly, the literature that conceptualises ‘disaster education’ in education is minimal. This paper aims to fill this gap by synthesising existing disaster education literature linking them with educational concepts. The paper suggests three possible conceptualisations for disaster education. The first is based on a temporal distinction between education undertaken in usual times or unusual times. The second conceptualisation applies modes of learning and teaching: formal, non-formal and informal. Thirdly, establishing disaster education as a sub-discipline in the field of education is proposed: one sub-discipline is lifelong learning and the other is public pedagogy. Critiquing each method of conceptualisation, the paper argues for the suitability and usefulness of locating ‘disaster education’ within public pedagogy.

The purpose of this paper is to relate disaster risk reduction activities to learning perspectives and theories. The paper refers to ‘disaster risk reduction activities’ encompassing various terms used in the existing disaster risk management literature, such as ‘disaster education’ and ‘capacity building’. One thing they have in common is the involvement of the general public in preparing for natural hazards. Disaster risk reduction activities involve learning, because they aim to change people’s behaviour, perception and emotion. An overview of the relationships between disaster risk reduction activities and learning theories has not been offered, and that is what this paper aims to achieve. ‘How people learn’ has been studied in the fields of psychology and education over the years. Evolving from the primary focus of acquisition of knowledge and skills, the understanding of ‘what learning is’ has broadened to envisage emotional and social dimensions. Referring to the historical development of five major learning perspectives, the paper links each perspective with specific disaster risk reduction activities. The foci of the studies of disaster risk reduction activities have beenwhatpeople should learn, rather thanhowpeople learn. Engagement with learning perspectives and theories will allow conceptualising how people learn to be prepared and resilient, which will benefit disaster risk management.

Natural disasters are frequently exacerbated by anthropogenic mechanisms and have social and political consequences for communities. The role of community learning in disasters is seen to be increasingly important. However, the ways in which such learning unfolds in a disaster can differ substantially from case to case. This article uses a comparative case study methodology to examine catastrophes and major disasters from five countries (Japan, New Zealand, the UK, the USA and Germany) to consider how community learning and adaptation occurs. An ecological model of learning is considered, where community learning is of small loop (adaptive, incremental, experimental) type or large loop (paradigm changing) type. Using this model, we consider that there are three types of community learning that occur in disasters (navigation, organization, reframing). The type of community learning that actually develops in a disaster depends upon a range of social factors such as stress and trauma, civic innovation and coercion.

Preparedness for disaster scenarios is progressively becoming an educational agenda for governments because of diversifying risks and threats worldwide. In disaster-prone Japan, disaster preparedness has been a prioritised national agenda, and preparedness education has been undertaken in both formal schooling and lifelong learning settings. This article examines the politics behind one prevailing policy discourse in the field of disaster preparedness referred to as ‘the four forms of aid’ – ‘kojo [public aid]’, ‘jijo [self-help]’, ‘gojo/kyojo [mutual aid]’. The study looks at the Japanese case, however, the significance is global, given that neo-liberal governments are increasingly having to deal with a range of disaster situations whether floods or terrorism, while implementing austerity measures. Drawing on the theory of the adaptiveness of neo-liberalism, the article sheds light on the hybridity of the current Abe government’s politics: a ‘dominant’ neo-liberal economic approach – public aid and self-help – and a ‘subordinate’ moral conservative agenda – mutual aid. It is argued that the four forms of aid are an effective ‘balancing act’, and that kyojo in particular is a powerful legitimator in the hybrid politics. The article concludes that a lifelong and life-wide preparedness model could be developed in Japan which has taken a social approach to lifelong learning.