Within the World Expo I saw Commons A and D. I also saw a few countries like Senegal, Chile, and India. I did not see much talk about new technology being utilized within some of these countries’ pavilions. Most countries talked about either the accomplishments of the past or focused on specific industries that made them stand out or provided a larger opportunity for growth globally.

Ghana was a country in Common A, in the Empowering Lives Zone. The pavilion talked mainly about the free high school program established in 2017, which eliminated fees and tuition for senior high and vocational schools, and the increased amount of tourists since the year 2019. The pavilion fell short of addressing how Ghana was effectively taking charge of addressing issues that are currently plaguing the country. It was as if they were praising themselves for their past without looking toward what the government, private, or individuals are currently doing to prepare for the future. It would have been interesting to see what they were doing to prepare for the expected population growth in 2050 which will increase the number of youth. It would have also been interesting to see ways in which the country was trying to decrease the congestion in its main city.

Some other countries fell short of the expo, their pavilions were just about promoting tourism to their countries. They did not respond to/ understand the given assignment for the expo. It felt like a wasted opportunity to address incoming and potential change for the future. It would have been great to see how some countries were preparing for an increase in mobility through population growth.

Some new technology I saw was from the SkyDrive pavilion, it is a fully electric aircraft that produces zero CO2 emissions during flights. It was designed for passenger transport and meets safety standards similar to commercial airplanes. SkyDrive plans to realize its commercial services in Osaka around 2028. It was cool to see new forms of mobility and how they tie into what we learned at the University of Tsukuba through student presentations. Where group 2, I think, talked about the possibility of creating new cities to decrease congestion in major cities while increasing connectivity through air travel. It is amazing to see how fast and how far technology is advancing. I am excited and a little anxious to see what the next 5 to 25 years look like as I continue to grow and learn.

My worldview as a result of studying abroad has expanded. Through this experience, I have learned that sometimes engineers tend to overcomplicate solutions to problems that can and should be solved through effective policy changes instead of technology. It seems like sometimes these technological solutions are not solving the problem but rather covering or hiding the problem. As a future engineer, I want to learn the balance between using policy and technology to effectively make solve problems. 

A cultural difference I noticed was the difference in the meaning of the word “inclusive,” Japan uses the term often to refer to elderly people, people with disabilities, and people with children. In contrast, the term “ inclusive” refers to people of different racial/ethnic groups, people with disabilities, and people with different gender identities. In my opinion, America rarely thinks about the aging population unless when talking about how social security is currently running out. I do not think that most transit designs are centered on easy mobility for elderly people. Another cultural difference I noticed was the lack of interaction between Japanese people who do not know each other. I have not heard or seen two strangers just compliment each other on outfits, and talk about the weather or news. Small talk does not exist between strangers here. Every interaction I have noticed between people seems to have some sort of familiarity. From elevators to busways you can get around without having to ask someone something as common as “What floor are you going to?”

As a someone who takes the COTA bus daily as a means of getting to university and a public transit enthusiast, I have to say that Japan’s transit just flows seamlessly together. COTA relatively easier to navigate because there are not a lot of existing transit lines. The traffic flow within Japan’s buses are much more efficient, people can only get in through one door and exist through the other. The bus drivers have multiple mirrors that allow them to see the flow of passengers within the bus. To see who is getting off and how many more people can fit within the bus. This system is much more convenient for passengers, so they do not have to worry about missing their stop due to a crowded bus. Another cool thing is that people can only get on the bus after have gotten off.  Japan bus drivers do not have protective casing around them like Columbus bus drivers.  I did not see any messaging on the buses that suggested respectable/un respectable ways of treating a bus drivers. I can only assume that bus drivers in Japan do not get assaulted on a frequent basis to require a physical barrier of protection. One thing that would be nice to see on COTA buses would be explicit language/ messaging for who gets to use priority sitting. It would be interesting COTA could implement a passenger flow system similar to Kyoto’s. 

Some questions I have are: Is it more profitable to pay before you ride system like the COTA or pay after you ride like Kyoto’s transit? Could Tsukuba’s distance pricing be implemented in COTA system? Would it be beneficial in improving the efficiency and quality of the transit or will it disadvantage the low income communities it is supposed to benefit. 

I was first introduced to the concept of Transit-oriented development during my Intro to City and Regional Planning course. During the duration of the course, we talked about TOD but in more of a theoretical sense. We touched on different transit systems/designs mostly focusing on American and European cities. It was interesting to be able to see a real-life application of TOD in one of Japan’s cities. I think another cool thing is seeing the different types of mobility options/guides for people with disability in Japan. It would be interesting to incorporate these design aids into Coulmbus’s existing disability mobility guides. It inspires me to think about the possibility within transportation and community design. I am excited for mobility within the global space and Columbus. I think more often engineers and planners are thinking about inclusive and pedestrian-friendly modes of transportation. For example, Columbus is currently working towards connectivity through bikeways and sidewalks as a way to promote active mobility within the city.

It also left me with a few unanswered questions like: Can TOD work in today’s current space of developing countries? The financing and monopoly of TOD? How does one get a vested interest from communities reliant on cars? Would a community built through the TOD concept today be affordable for the average person? Do trains work more efficiently when privatized or public?

Another thing that made me hopeful was the research being done at the National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Resilience. The Large-scale Earthquake Simulator and Large-scale Rainfall Simulator are things that were probably not anticipated by society. But they are needed in today’s society as a way to test for potential storms. This inspired me to think about the different ways of researching disaster and resilience preparation. I am curious as to how other countries are preparing for future climate changes and also the collaboration countries are having. I am worried about countries that have not started the process of even thinking about future climate change or cannot afford to build research facilities.

In general, the future of technology in mobility and community leaves me conflicted. On the one hand, I am excited about the work being done to promote active and inclusive transportation and resilience and disaster design. On the other hand, I am scared about how technology is being used to overcomplicate solutions to problems that require either no technology or policy change. For example, the use of AI in anything and everything as a way to revolutionize design.

The first feelings I had when I arrived in Japan were tiredness and surety. It felt like I had not traveled to a different country. My academic goal for the JADE program was to learn more about Japan’s housing infrastructure, and their combination of culture into design. I am also interested in learning about Japan’s resilience-building methods and how they prepare for the effects of climate change. So far I am working to complete my goals through conversations with students at the University of Tsukuba and following the presentations/lectures from the professors at the University of Tsukuba. What I hope to take away from the JADE program is an increased understanding of how engineering can be used to create an Inclusive Smart Society (ISS) and also an understanding of how collaboration within engineering will shape the future of the community. I also want to take away an increased form of curiosity to learn more about Smart Cities, transit-orientated development, and so on.

During the first week, I want to remember the presentation we had on Transit Oriented Delvelopment in Japan by Nakhisa Okamoto, Dr. Eng. He talked about the history of transit within Japan, he spoke about the privatization of the railway system and how it benefited the growth of transit within Japan. He also spoke about Transit Oriented Development and the benefits of development following transit. His presentation allowed me to answer a question I received from a professor within my city and regional class.  I previously believed that transit and development work hand in hand and that you can not build new development without transit and vice versa. Right now I am leaning towards development following transit because it allows for a high-density design around the area incorporating every a community needs to survive from food to healthcare access. Transit Oriented Development requires full capacity of creation to ensure its success. I also want to remember the concrete testing from the large-scale structure testing lab. It was cool to see how research within Japan aims to work on concrete strength as a way to make buildings more resilient during earthquakes. I also want to remember that profitability is essential for the innovation of a system. But it is also important to not directly relate profitability to how much more money one can make but also to the social benefit it has in communities.

This week a cultural difference I observed was that people in Japan tend to form lines pretty easily and quickly.