It’s really simple. Telling people to stay indoors is a sensible thing for 24-48hrs, but to demand it for days and days puts people in a situation where no businesses are open, no food is delivered, nobody can go out to get anything, etc.
you might as well pack up and leave because you cant do anything.
It’s almost as shortsighted as the N.O. Superdome fiasco.
They should simple lift the limit on movement in the 20-30km zone. Either evacuate or do nothing, and at this point the levels are low enough such that ‘do nothing’ is okay.
I recall thinking the same at the moment the Japanese made the first 30km warning announcement with the travel restriction. IIRC, around March 15, the Japanese issued the 30 km zone warning for residents inside the outermost 10 km band of the zone to stay indoors. Around March 17, the 50 mile US voluntary evacuation warning to its citizens was given. It seems to me that the Japanese 30 km warning had two characteristics: the assumption that the Japanese people would accept the authority without question; and that the recommendation was technically sound and feasible. For the latter, the benign expectation may have been that the danger would imminently subside after a day or two. However, instead, the warning level was subsequently upgraded by the Japanese to a voluntary evacuation zone around March 25. That was 10 days after the stay-indoors warning. In retrospect, at least, the March 15 warning seems short sighted. Furthermore it makes the Japanese government look shortsighted and less concerned for its citizens' well-being in comparison to the US government.
The effect of the change in the warning level might be expected to increase Japanese citizens' distrust of its authorities. This, in turn, would serve to hamstring the authorities and thwart cooperation from citizens the next time an emergency were to occur and a warning or directive given. So, the Japanese authorities may be in danger of being perceived as short sighted and secretive, and being painted into a corner by the ineffectiveness of their own actions, and the only thing that would seem to be able to save them might be more transparency in their procedures. Open procedures in turn seem somewhat counter to their culture, so this may be a challenge for the Japanese to overcome. There have been several minor incidents with TEPCO in the past, and often, more openness to the public was promised...