2006 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Comparative Study on Social and Spatial Succession with Housing and Urban Reconstruction Process After Earthquake Disasters in Asia
| Project/Area Number |
16252002
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 海外学術 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Natural disaster science
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Tokyo Metropolitan University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
NAKABAYASHI Itsuki Tokyo Metropolitan University, Graduate School of Urban Environmental Sciences, Professor, 都市環境科学研究科, 教授 (80094275)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
AIBA Shin Tokyo Metropolitan University, Graduate School of Urban Environmental Sciences, Assistant professor, 都市環境科学研究科, 助教 (50308186)
ICHIKO Taro Tokyo Metropolitan University, Graduate School of Urban Environmental Sciences, Assistant professor, 都市環境科学研究科, 助教 (10318355)
IKEDA Hirotaka Fuji Tokoha University, College of Environment &Disaster Research, Professor, 環境防災学部, 教授 (80340131)
SAWADA Masahiro Nagaoka Inst. of Design, Faculty of Design, Associate professor, 造形学部, 講師 (00329343)
MENO Fumitake National Institute for Land and InfrastructureManagement, Housing Department, Research officer, 住宅研究部, 研究員 (60302965)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2004 – 2006
|
| Keywords | Turkey Marmara Earthquake / Taiwan Chi-chi Earthquake / Niigata-ken Chuetstu Earthquake / Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake / Recovery from Earthquake disasters / Housing Reconstruction / Earthquake insurance / Active fault |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
Recently, a lot of earthquake disasters have happened in Asia. From those earthquakes, comparative surveys about social-spatial succession and mandates were conducted on Turkey Marmara (1999), Taiwan Chi-chi (1999) and Hanshin-Awaji (1995). Spatial aspect of recovery from earthquake disasters has two patterns, the former is transferring recovery. The latter is on devastated site recovery. Though these two patterns were observed each nation, there were contractive activities in both patterns.
In Japan, self-help is a principal of recovery. For households owned their houses, on devastated site recovery is a main path, but group removal project for disaster prevention has been done because of risk on devastated site. The other hand, most of households rented houses took transferring recovery pattern. They also rented houses apart from on site.
In Turkey, soil conditions were main reason of building loss. Then, building prohibit regulation were executed and apartment or office buildings which built on no damaged suburb area were sold by special prices to damaged house or office owners on condition of only one house or office. On results, rebuilding and repairing damaged buildings was definitely delayed.
In Taiwan, cevastated area were around area of moved faults and mountain rural area above epicenter. The principal of recovery is on devastated site recovery. But if there was a severe conditioned settlement where had risk of land slide or existed on strict slope, transferring recovery project had been conducted. The main characteristics of recovery form Chi-chi earthquake Was the role of public-private recovery fund organization that flexibly supported group activities like damaged condominium rebuilding project.]
The photos and GIS database which archived recovery actualities was produced experimentally.
|
