大槌町赤浜集落の避難先の実態と日常拠点・計画避難地の関係:日常生活と緊急避難期から避難生活期までの各期間に着目して

Translated title of the contribution: A STUDY ON THE EVACUATION PLACES DURING AND AFTER GREAT EAST JAPAN EARTHQUAKE IN RELATION TO THE TRANSITION OF DAILY GATHERING PLACES AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PLACES:A case of Akahama, Otsuchi from emergency evacuation phase to refuge life phase

神原 康介, 窪田 亜矢, 黒瀬 武史, 田中 暁子, 道喜 開視

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

 Akahama in Otsuchi, Iwate prefecture is one of the areas severely damaged by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (3.11). A purpose of this paper is to clarify how residents used the evacuation places and shelters from emergency evacuation phase to refugee life phase in 3.11 in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness places and the transition of daily gathering places in order to get the suggestion about how to design a disaster preparedness place. In chapter 2, it is clarified that how evacuation places were used in three phases. In emergency evacuation phase, many residents evacuated to an elementary school, but there was flooded and many people got wet. In temporarily shelter use phase, residents could find a printing office near the school and about 140 people stayed there for 3 days. Many residents went to private houses and stayed. 3-chome residents could not find large facilities, so they went to a neighboring village. In refuge life phase, about 80 residents used the gymnasium of school, about 20 residents used welfare facility and 8 households used 2 vacant houses that were owned by Otsuchi-cho. In chapter 3 and 4, transition of disaster preparedness places and daily gathering places are clarified. In chapter 3, findings are as follows. 1) A damage of past tsunami was recorded, but evacuation behaviors or the places where people gathered was not passed down. 2) the understanding that a school was designated as a disaster preparedness place was widely shared. 3) In the late 80's, a numbers of preparedness place increased because of expansion of village. 4) In the late 90's, 1-chome's preparedness place was gathered to a school because a new gymnasium was built. 5) In the late 2000's, local organization decided that Akahama had 3 prepared places in terms of governance after a discussion that Hachiman Shrine didn't have a enough space. In chapter 4, findings are as follows. 1) A school and Community center had been the base of Akahama community. 2) A school had been the base of community, and that's why a school became center of disaster preparedness place in spite that there was not evacuation place during Sanriku tsunami of 1933. 3) A community center had been the base of community and located a little higher ground, and that's why disaster prevention materials was stocked before 3.11. In chapter 5, evacuation places and shelters in 3.11 are analyzed in three phases in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness place and daily gathering place. It is found that in emergency evacuation phase, a school had been known as a preparedness place in spite that in the past there was not evacuation place and gymnasium was located in dead end, and in 3.11 many residents were exposed to danger. In temporarily shelter use phase and refuge life phase, it can be necessary to think preparedness place not only inner village but also wider area, etc. In chapter 6, the following four points are suggested. 1) It is important to think the role of disaster preparedness place in the disaster phases. 2) Changes of a village environment and modernization of daily gathering place influence a numbers and characteristics of disaster preparedness place. 3) The actual condition of evacuation behavior such as gathering places in past tsunami disaster is necessary to be come up for discussion about the disaster prepared. 4) For the occurrence of a gap between evacuation places and disaster preparedness place, residential network is needed for a use of private houses or facilities, and also vacant ones owned by municipality should be prepared for an emergency evacuation.
Original languageJapanese
Pages (from-to)1333-1343
Number of pages11
Journal日本建築学会計画系論文集
Volume81
Issue number724
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

disaster
natural disaster
Japan
resident
sports facility
village
school center
school
community center
community
refugee
elementary school
municipality
modernization
damages
welfare
governance
organization

Cite this

大槌町赤浜集落の避難先の実態と日常拠点・計画避難地の関係:日常生活と緊急避難期から避難生活期までの各期間に着目して. / 神原康介; 窪田亜矢; 黒瀬武史; 田中暁子; 道喜開視.

In: 日本建築学会計画系論文集, Vol. 81, No. 724, 2016, p. 1333-1343.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{00a968a324b4496ab9ee6ecd979fc567,
title = "大槌町赤浜集落の避難先の実態と日常拠点・計画避難地の関係:日常生活と緊急避難期から避難生活期までの各期間に着目して",
abstract = " Akahama in Otsuchi, Iwate prefecture is one of the areas severely damaged by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (3.11). A purpose of this paper is to clarify how residents used the evacuation places and shelters from emergency evacuation phase to refugee life phase in 3.11 in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness places and the transition of daily gathering places in order to get the suggestion about how to design a disaster preparedness place. In chapter 2, it is clarified that how evacuation places were used in three phases. In emergency evacuation phase, many residents evacuated to an elementary school, but there was flooded and many people got wet. In temporarily shelter use phase, residents could find a printing office near the school and about 140 people stayed there for 3 days. Many residents went to private houses and stayed. 3-chome residents could not find large facilities, so they went to a neighboring village. In refuge life phase, about 80 residents used the gymnasium of school, about 20 residents used welfare facility and 8 households used 2 vacant houses that were owned by Otsuchi-cho. In chapter 3 and 4, transition of disaster preparedness places and daily gathering places are clarified. In chapter 3, findings are as follows. 1) A damage of past tsunami was recorded, but evacuation behaviors or the places where people gathered was not passed down. 2) the understanding that a school was designated as a disaster preparedness place was widely shared. 3) In the late 80's, a numbers of preparedness place increased because of expansion of village. 4) In the late 90's, 1-chome's preparedness place was gathered to a school because a new gymnasium was built. 5) In the late 2000's, local organization decided that Akahama had 3 prepared places in terms of governance after a discussion that Hachiman Shrine didn't have a enough space. In chapter 4, findings are as follows. 1) A school and Community center had been the base of Akahama community. 2) A school had been the base of community, and that's why a school became center of disaster preparedness place in spite that there was not evacuation place during Sanriku tsunami of 1933. 3) A community center had been the base of community and located a little higher ground, and that's why disaster prevention materials was stocked before 3.11. In chapter 5, evacuation places and shelters in 3.11 are analyzed in three phases in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness place and daily gathering place. It is found that in emergency evacuation phase, a school had been known as a preparedness place in spite that in the past there was not evacuation place and gymnasium was located in dead end, and in 3.11 many residents were exposed to danger. In temporarily shelter use phase and refuge life phase, it can be necessary to think preparedness place not only inner village but also wider area, etc. In chapter 6, the following four points are suggested. 1) It is important to think the role of disaster preparedness place in the disaster phases. 2) Changes of a village environment and modernization of daily gathering place influence a numbers and characteristics of disaster preparedness place. 3) The actual condition of evacuation behavior such as gathering places in past tsunami disaster is necessary to be come up for discussion about the disaster prepared. 4) For the occurrence of a gap between evacuation places and disaster preparedness place, residential network is needed for a use of private houses or facilities, and also vacant ones owned by municipality should be prepared for an emergency evacuation.",
author = "康介 神原 and 亜矢 窪田 and 武史 黒瀬 and 暁子 田中 and 開視 道喜",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.3130/aija.81.1333",
language = "Japanese",
volume = "81",
pages = "1333--1343",
journal = "日本建築学会計画系論文集",
issn = "1340-4210",
publisher = "日本建築学会",
number = "724",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 大槌町赤浜集落の避難先の実態と日常拠点・計画避難地の関係:日常生活と緊急避難期から避難生活期までの各期間に着目して

AU - 神原, 康介

AU - 窪田, 亜矢

AU - 黒瀬, 武史

AU - 田中, 暁子

AU - 道喜, 開視

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 -  Akahama in Otsuchi, Iwate prefecture is one of the areas severely damaged by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (3.11). A purpose of this paper is to clarify how residents used the evacuation places and shelters from emergency evacuation phase to refugee life phase in 3.11 in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness places and the transition of daily gathering places in order to get the suggestion about how to design a disaster preparedness place. In chapter 2, it is clarified that how evacuation places were used in three phases. In emergency evacuation phase, many residents evacuated to an elementary school, but there was flooded and many people got wet. In temporarily shelter use phase, residents could find a printing office near the school and about 140 people stayed there for 3 days. Many residents went to private houses and stayed. 3-chome residents could not find large facilities, so they went to a neighboring village. In refuge life phase, about 80 residents used the gymnasium of school, about 20 residents used welfare facility and 8 households used 2 vacant houses that were owned by Otsuchi-cho. In chapter 3 and 4, transition of disaster preparedness places and daily gathering places are clarified. In chapter 3, findings are as follows. 1) A damage of past tsunami was recorded, but evacuation behaviors or the places where people gathered was not passed down. 2) the understanding that a school was designated as a disaster preparedness place was widely shared. 3) In the late 80's, a numbers of preparedness place increased because of expansion of village. 4) In the late 90's, 1-chome's preparedness place was gathered to a school because a new gymnasium was built. 5) In the late 2000's, local organization decided that Akahama had 3 prepared places in terms of governance after a discussion that Hachiman Shrine didn't have a enough space. In chapter 4, findings are as follows. 1) A school and Community center had been the base of Akahama community. 2) A school had been the base of community, and that's why a school became center of disaster preparedness place in spite that there was not evacuation place during Sanriku tsunami of 1933. 3) A community center had been the base of community and located a little higher ground, and that's why disaster prevention materials was stocked before 3.11. In chapter 5, evacuation places and shelters in 3.11 are analyzed in three phases in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness place and daily gathering place. It is found that in emergency evacuation phase, a school had been known as a preparedness place in spite that in the past there was not evacuation place and gymnasium was located in dead end, and in 3.11 many residents were exposed to danger. In temporarily shelter use phase and refuge life phase, it can be necessary to think preparedness place not only inner village but also wider area, etc. In chapter 6, the following four points are suggested. 1) It is important to think the role of disaster preparedness place in the disaster phases. 2) Changes of a village environment and modernization of daily gathering place influence a numbers and characteristics of disaster preparedness place. 3) The actual condition of evacuation behavior such as gathering places in past tsunami disaster is necessary to be come up for discussion about the disaster prepared. 4) For the occurrence of a gap between evacuation places and disaster preparedness place, residential network is needed for a use of private houses or facilities, and also vacant ones owned by municipality should be prepared for an emergency evacuation.

AB -  Akahama in Otsuchi, Iwate prefecture is one of the areas severely damaged by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (3.11). A purpose of this paper is to clarify how residents used the evacuation places and shelters from emergency evacuation phase to refugee life phase in 3.11 in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness places and the transition of daily gathering places in order to get the suggestion about how to design a disaster preparedness place. In chapter 2, it is clarified that how evacuation places were used in three phases. In emergency evacuation phase, many residents evacuated to an elementary school, but there was flooded and many people got wet. In temporarily shelter use phase, residents could find a printing office near the school and about 140 people stayed there for 3 days. Many residents went to private houses and stayed. 3-chome residents could not find large facilities, so they went to a neighboring village. In refuge life phase, about 80 residents used the gymnasium of school, about 20 residents used welfare facility and 8 households used 2 vacant houses that were owned by Otsuchi-cho. In chapter 3 and 4, transition of disaster preparedness places and daily gathering places are clarified. In chapter 3, findings are as follows. 1) A damage of past tsunami was recorded, but evacuation behaviors or the places where people gathered was not passed down. 2) the understanding that a school was designated as a disaster preparedness place was widely shared. 3) In the late 80's, a numbers of preparedness place increased because of expansion of village. 4) In the late 90's, 1-chome's preparedness place was gathered to a school because a new gymnasium was built. 5) In the late 2000's, local organization decided that Akahama had 3 prepared places in terms of governance after a discussion that Hachiman Shrine didn't have a enough space. In chapter 4, findings are as follows. 1) A school and Community center had been the base of Akahama community. 2) A school had been the base of community, and that's why a school became center of disaster preparedness place in spite that there was not evacuation place during Sanriku tsunami of 1933. 3) A community center had been the base of community and located a little higher ground, and that's why disaster prevention materials was stocked before 3.11. In chapter 5, evacuation places and shelters in 3.11 are analyzed in three phases in relation to the transition of disaster preparedness place and daily gathering place. It is found that in emergency evacuation phase, a school had been known as a preparedness place in spite that in the past there was not evacuation place and gymnasium was located in dead end, and in 3.11 many residents were exposed to danger. In temporarily shelter use phase and refuge life phase, it can be necessary to think preparedness place not only inner village but also wider area, etc. In chapter 6, the following four points are suggested. 1) It is important to think the role of disaster preparedness place in the disaster phases. 2) Changes of a village environment and modernization of daily gathering place influence a numbers and characteristics of disaster preparedness place. 3) The actual condition of evacuation behavior such as gathering places in past tsunami disaster is necessary to be come up for discussion about the disaster prepared. 4) For the occurrence of a gap between evacuation places and disaster preparedness place, residential network is needed for a use of private houses or facilities, and also vacant ones owned by municipality should be prepared for an emergency evacuation.

U2 - 10.3130/aija.81.1333

DO - 10.3130/aija.81.1333

M3 - 記事

VL - 81

SP - 1333

EP - 1343

JO - 日本建築学会計画系論文集

JF - 日本建築学会計画系論文集

SN - 1340-4210

IS - 724

ER -