Towards a policy that supports people-centered housing recovery—learning from housing reconstruction after the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in Kobe, Japan

Abstract

The goal of disaster recovery is for survivors to regain stability in their lives, livelihoods, and housing. A people-centered housing recovery requires that residents are empowered to make decisions about their housing reconstruction, and that policies create housing options that support the ability of all residents to reconstruct their homes and lives. The 1995 Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake caused the largest amount of damage in Japan since World War II, and the subsequent recovery is a starting point for understanding contemporary post-disaster housing reconstruction policies in Japan. Beyond an overview of housing reconstruction programs, we can understand the impact these policies had on Kobe residents' housing and community recovery. In many cases, housing policies implemented after the Kobe earthquake fragmented communities and caused further damage and disruption in the lives of the survivors. A single-track approach failed to support the entire population of the disaster-stricken area. In subsequent years, Japanese disaster reconstruction laws and policies have seen modifications and improvements. Some of these changes can be seen in cases of recovery after more recent disasters, notably after the 2004 Chuetsu Earthquake in Niigata Prefecture. In the context of these past examples, we can consider what is needed for a people-centered recovery in the Tohoku area after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami.

Housing Recovery after Disasters: Primary versus Seasonal and Vacation Housing Markets in Coastal Communities

“…Unsurprisingly, the level of damage sustained by homes has significant debilitating effects on both short and long-term recovery (Zhang & Peacock, 2010;Peacock et al, 2014). However, damage levels are a function of the hazard agent itself and are related to housing conditions associated with housing type and tenure (Maly & Shiozaki, 2012) neighborhood characteristics such as income and race/ethnicity (Bolin, 1982(Bolin, & 1985Bolton, 1983 and1986;Peacock & Girard, 1997;Van Zandt, Peacock, Henry, Grover, Highfield, & Brody, 2012;Gotham, 2014;. This relationship between high levels of damage and social vulnerability factors results from filtering (Grigsby, 1963;Myers, 1975) whereby older, lower valued, and poorer quality homes often house low-income and minority populations (Van Zandt et al, 2012;Peacock et al, 2014).…”

Impact of Japanese Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Areas’ (THAs) Design on Mental and Social Health

“…Entry into the THAs was decided by lottery, without considering the pre-disaster communities [29]. The Japanese system [36] prioritized entrance to the THAs for those affected people who could not afford a house, starting with the elderly and disabled, meaning that in Kobe’s THAs 30% of residents were seniors and disabled, in comparison to 14% in the overall population [35].…”

“…Until the Kobe earthquake, the Japanese system was characterized by its single-track approach [29]: its provisional housing supply was covered exclusively through THAs.…”

“…The changes applied to disaster management after Kobe focused on trying to prevent kodokushi through a variety of initiatives [18,26,29,30]. First, initiatives were devised to directly support the mental health of residents by establishing medical and psychological support services in THAs.…”

The Impact of Earthquake on Poverty: Learning from the 12 May 2008 Wenchuan Earthquake

“…Despite the damage and the deepening of poverty caused by the Wenchuan earthquake, the large amount of investment in disaster prevention and mitigation together with post-disaster recovery and reconstruction by the state and various levels of governments have also brought benefits to poverty alleviation [27]. Through the investigation of hidden high risk points such as landslides and debris flows and floods, rural housing land was rationally planned to avoid high-risk areas.…”