Dam Construction and Involuntary Resettlement in Japan: Constructing dams often involves number of households to be resettled involuntarily and is nowadays being faced with severe criticism in spite of various efforts by the concerned governments and donor agencies. In Japan, there were many cases of dam construction with involuntary resettlement, though the number of families affected per project was fairly smaller. Especially, in 1950s and ‘60s, as Japan experienced economic growth involuntary resettlement with dam construction was major social issue.Research and Practice in Involuntary Resettlement Caused by Dam: Existing literatures on research and practice in dam resettlement has two poles. One is “managerial view”, which sees involuntary resettlement as a part of development projects and seeks for “better” resettlement. The other is “movementist view”, which critically questions involuntary resettlement as well as development itself. Many researches and practices (including protests by NGOs) are in between these two poles. However, resettler’s strategy and choice coping with resettlement situation and new livelihood do not receive proper attention in either view. Ikawa Dam resettlement in 1950s’ Japan: In this study, involuntary resettlement of Ikawa Dam in Shizuoka Prefecture is examined. Ikawa Dam, completed in 1957 along the Ohi River, was constructed for the purpose of hydro power generation. It caused involuntary resettlement of 193 households among 550 households in Ikawa village. The approach taken in this resettlement was “New Village Building” as to reconstruct resettlers’ livelihood. As a relatively early development project in post-war Japan, Ikawa Dam Project adopted land-for-land approach for resettlement and compensation instead of monetary compensation, which was later introduced under the common guideline established in 1960s.Resettlers’ Choice and Long-term Consequences of Resettlement: In the study, intensive interviews were made to villagers who moved and then remained in newly developed resettlement area more than 50 years. The interview result reveals several points worth noting. First, resettlers’ choices to move to resettlement area were not necessarily rational or collective. Second, although the village community currently suffers depopulation and aging, many resettlers are satisfied with their choice and livelihood so far. Third, main reason for their satisfaction lies in the successful rearing of their children or second generation.Implications for Future Research and Practice: Although further studies on other dam resettlement experiences are needed, implications derived from the study are; Planning and implementation of resettlement program needs two elements. One is far-sightedness which may eventually assist to establish livelihood for the second generation. The other is proper attention to resettler’s possible decision as well as restraint to make rational decision.