Final Symposium on “Exploration of Practical Wisdom and Resilience Overcoming Downside Risk: Collecting grassroots voices in Africa under COVID-19”

On October 31, 2025, the SDGs Collaborative Research Unit at the Institute for Future Initiatives (IFI) of the University of Tokyo and Japan Society for African Studies (JSAS) held the final symposium of the international collaborative research project “Exploration of Practical Wisdom and Resilience Overcoming Downside Risk – Collecting grassroots voices in Africa under COVID-19.”

This study was conducted over three years, from December 2021 to November 2024, across seven African countries (the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zimbabwe). It focused on both the risks posed by the COVID-19 pandemic itself and the secondary risks arising from government infection-control measures, with the aim of clarifying people’s risk perceptions and actual resilience.

In the opening remarks, Prof. Kensuke Fukushi, Director of the IFI, highlighted the significant momentum gained in Japan–Africa collaboration at the Ninth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD9) held this August. He then underscored the importance of the present study, which captures “grassroots resilience” across seven African countries.

In the subsequent presentation of research findings, Specially Appointed Lecturer Dr. Kazuyo Hanai, Project Director, outlined the overall design of the study. The online survey, which yielded 840 responses, revealed a low perception of risk regarding COVID-19 across all seven countries, as well as low levels of trust in government, in contrast to high levels of trust in medical professionals. The interviews and focus group discussions conducted in each country further revealed the following points:

In Zimbabwe, while the deaths of prominent figures temporarily heightened public awareness of the crisis, there was a risk trade-off in which attention to agricultural risks diminished. While people criticized government corruption, they nevertheless supported the public health measures and drew on community ties and informal support networks as sources of resilience. In South Africa, despite the severity of the pandemic, people identified economic hardship and the deterioration of public services as their primary risks, and they navigated these difficulties through connections with family members and civil society. In particular, middle-class citizens played a key role in sustaining societal resilience, and their actions were seen in a positive light as forms of mutual assistance grounded in the spirit of Ubuntu.

In Uganda, the overlap of elections and the pandemic politicized infection control, with people perceiving government-imposed lockdowns as a greater risk than the virus itself. In Kenya and Tanzania, young people engaged in “hustling”—starting small businesses to continue education online or support household income—serving as a community-level coping strategy based on informal networks. In Ethiopia, misinformation via social media and word of mouth affected vaccine uptake, while trust in experts mediated through religious beliefs influenced vaccination behavior, highlighting the importance of collaboration with cultural and traditional leaders to combat misinformation. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, women and displaced persons in conflict-affected areas faced hardships that eroded self-esteem and social capital, emphasizing the need for livelihood assistance, as restrictions on pandemic support weakened women’s resilience.

From these findings, the study proposed four policy recommendations:
1.Minimize risk trade-offs by balancing infection control measures with economic activity.
2.Remain vigilant against democratic risks posed by the politicization of infection control and power centralization.
3.Implement misinformation countermeasures grounded in local culture and trust networks.
4.Support and strengthen informal networks that form the basis of resilience during crises, even in peacetime.

Following the presentation of the research findings, three advisors to the project offered their comments.
Mr. Masaki Inaba from the Africa Japan Forum pointed out the importance of this project examining infection control from the social-scientific perspective of African. He expressed a sense of crisis that we are living in a world where the impact of COVID continues, and the information space, in particular, has become a battleground, including concerns about post-COVID inflation, debt crises, and the spread of misinformation via social media. In Africa, more emphasis was placed on risks from countermeasures rather than on the disease itself, while in Japan, social discipline helped overcome the crisis, though its foundations are now weakening. He stressed the need to redefine practical knowledge and build sustainable societies in response to these changes.

Prof. Atsuo Kishimoto from Osaka University indicated that risk is not simply danger but a broad concept involving decision-making under uncertainty, emphasizing the importance of clearly defining “what to protect.” As the objects of protection now extend beyond life and property to human rights and ecosystems, risk trade-offs have become more complex. He stressed the necessity of analyzing risk not only in total amounts but also in terms of distribution. Since regulations and measures are influenced by human behavior, it is essential in ordinary times to discuss what should be protected and to carry out simulations that take into consideration unpredictable behaviors. He concluded that maintaining expert independence while functionally separating risk assessment from risk management, and building trust in informal networks on a day to day basis, are key to governance.

Associate Prof. Ayako Takemi from the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology, the University of Tokyo, emphasized the importance of cultural and social contexts in infection control and the necessity of finely tuned understanding of local realities for policymaking, particularly in the context of global equity and North-South issues. She also highlighted the significance of preparedness and division of responsibilities in the face of the politicization and securitization of pandemic responses and noted the international value of Japan leading such discussions. The findings offer applicable insights for both developed and developing countries. Furthermore, she has commented on the need to examine digital sovereignty and information management, taking into consideration the balance of freedom of expression and political instability in countries where information regulations are advancing and in Africa.

Comments were also provided by practitioners working in the field of global health during the symposium. Dr. Yosuke Kita from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs pointed out that, based on his experiences of introducing the HPV vaccine and handling the Diamond Princess, infection countermeasures are not just the issue of scientific knowledge but also maintaining a balance of human rights, economic impacts, and international trust. In current pandemic treaty negotiations, countries in the Global South have expressed strong dissatisfaction with unequal access to medical resources. He deemed that the study’s findings on the politicization of responses and mutual aid through informal networks provide important insights for understanding international negotiations. Future global health diplomacy requires not only equitable supply distribution but also institutional frameworks supporting grassroots resilience, and the study’s results serve as a guiding compass for this effort.

Mr. Junichi Takahashi from the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare commented that achieving universal health coverage (UHC) through strengthening health systems in ordinary times would mitigate social and economic shocks in crises and enhance resilience of society as a whole. He pointed out that, as the study suggests, when designing health system in each country to achieve UHC, it is important to reflect grassroots realities and to make and operate it in a neutral and impartial manner that avoids politicization. He also emphasized that trust in health systems would lead to trust in democracy and political institutions.

Mr. Yoshitaka Nishino from the Japan Center for International Exchange stated that while this proposal is aimed at international organizations, in order to translate it into concrete actions in the field, it is important to repeatedly engage in dialogue in ordinary times, taking into consideration the differences in values and risk perception of people, collaborations between formal and informal sectors, as well as diverse private-sector and civil society bodies, to build a flexible, trust-based society. He also noted that a single policy may impact different individuals differently, and that care and communication around risk must therefore be prioritized.

During the Q&A session, questions were raised related to how to handle misinformation in the event messages through influential figures backfire, and the background of how it was decided to submit proposals to relevant international communities and aid organizations, and how the relationships of the governments of various African countries and the views of local researchers were reflected.

Prof. Vic Sali of Aichi Gakuin University, who oversaw the Uganda component of the research project, reported that during the pandemic, limited access to hospitals led people to rely on traditional herbal remedies, while families and local communities served as crucial sources of psychological support. He explained that the generally positive evaluations of the government stemmed from a sense that their lives had been protected, particularly in comparison with the high mortality observed in Western countries. Despite distrust toward local governments and instances of political repression, the protection of life was prioritized at the time. Ms. Sato, responsible for the South Africa case study, noted that although public trust in the national government was low, the population did not take a uniformly critical stance because poverty-alleviation measures were implemented alongside infection-control policies. While not all policies were successful, many South Africans nonetheless recognized and appreciated the government’s efforts.

Looking forward, it is crucial to protect both lives and livelihoods, balancing infection control with economic activity, facing the dangers of political interference that can undermine democracy, and fostering informal networks capable of mutual aid even in difficult times.