Disaster and Economic Structural Change: Case Study on the 1995 Kobe Earthquake

Okuyama, Yasuhide

doi:10.1080/09535314.2013.871506

Cited by 60 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to asset losses, flow losses are often the main focus in the economic literature; see e.g. Hallegatte 2008;Rose and Wei, 2013;Okuyama, 2014). In the rest of the paper, we will refer to flow losses as output losses.…”

Section: Economic Loss Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional disaster impact analysis: comparing input–output and computable general equilibrium models

Koks

Carrera

Jonkeren

et al. 2016

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. A variety of models have been applied to assess the economic losses of disasters, of which the most common ones are input-output (IO) and computable general equilibrium (CGE) models. In addition, an increasing number of scholars have developed hybrid approaches: one that combines both or either of them in combination with noneconomic methods. While both IO and CGE models are widely used, they are mainly compared on theoretical grounds. Few studies have compared disaster impacts of different model types in a systematic way and for the same geographical area, using similar input data. Such a comparison is valuable from both a scientific and policy perspective as the magnitude and the spatial distribution of the estimated losses are born likely to vary with the chosen modelling approach (IO, CGE, or hybrid). Hence, regional disaster impact loss estimates resulting from a range of models facilitate better decisions and policy making. Therefore, this study analyses the economic consequences for a specific case study, using three regional disaster impact models: two hybrid IO models and a CGE model. The case study concerns two flood scenarios in the Po River basin in Italy. Modelling results indicate that the difference in estimated total (national) economic losses and the regional distribution of those losses may vary by up to a factor of 7 between the three models, depending on the type of recovery path. Total economic impact, comprising all Italian regions, is negative in all models though.

show abstract

Section: Economic Loss Valuationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regional disaster impact analysis: comparing input–output and computable general equilibrium models

Koks

Carrera

Jonkeren

et al. 2016

Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In defining the negative effects, frequent natural disasters are linked to low economic growth rates (Benson and Clay [1] and Yu Xiao [2]) and enduring consequences (Gall et al [3], Coffman and Noy [4] and Okuyama [5]). Natural disasters reduce household consumption over time without any sign of economic recovery (Dercon [6] and Mechler [7]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural Disasters, Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in China―An Empirical Study Using Provincial Panel Data

Guo

Liu

et al. 2015

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using a newly developed integrated indicator system with entropy weighting, we analyzed the panel data of 577 recorded disasters in 30 provinces of China from 1985-2011 to identify their links with the subsequent economic growth. Meteorological disasters promote economic growth through human capital instead of physical capital. Geological disasters did not trigger local economic growth from 1999-2011. Generally, natural disasters overall had no significant impact on economic growth from 1985-1998. Thus, human capital reinvestment should be the aim in managing recoveries, and it should be used to regenerate the local economy based on long-term sustainable development.

show abstract

“…Overall, the disaster may change the relative position of the local economy of the affected regions. Okuyama (2014) indicates that the Kobe earthquake in 1995 accelerated the hollowing-out process in the Kobe economy. Meanwhile, based on their study on the impact of two earthquakes in two Italian regions, Barone and Mocetti (2014) conclude that in the long term, the earthquake might exacerbate regional disparities in economic and social development.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of the 2006 Yogyakarta Earthquake on Local Economic Growth

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the local economic growth impacts of a specific natural disaster, viz. the Yogyakarta earthquake in 2006 employing data at the sub-national level in two provinces in Java, Indonesia. Specifically, we are concerned with the heterogeneity in the response of the various economic sectors to the earthquake, the spatial economic spill-overs from the affected regions to the non-affected districts, and the overall implications of the earthquake on the relative position of the local economies of the affected districts. We find that the earthquake did affect the growth of some sectors in the affected districts, but the shock did not change the (industrial) structure of the local economy. All sectors still had positive growth some years after the earthquake, which indicates the existence of a recovery processes following the shock.

show abstract

Disaster and Economic Structural Change: Case Study on the 1995 Kobe Earthquake

Cited by 60 publications

References 27 publications

Regional disaster impact analysis: comparing input–output and computable general equilibrium models

Regional disaster impact analysis: comparing input–output and computable general equilibrium models

Natural Disasters, Economic Growth and Sustainable Development in China―An Empirical Study Using Provincial Panel Data

The Impact of the 2006 Yogyakarta Earthquake on Local Economic Growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About