5:15 PM - 6:30 PM
[HDS08-P01] The role of residents' resilience on the recovery process in a torrential rain
Keywords:Disaster risk management, Recovery calendar, Resilience, Torrential rain
Disasters linked to natural hazards have increased sharply in the last 20 years (UNDR, 2020). Despite the massive disasters that have occurred, there are limitations to the national disaster prevention and mitigation frameworks that aim to reduce the impact of disasters. In recent times, the strategy of promoting resilient communities that have the ability to recover from disasters has become of interest. The study examined the relationships between the recovery process and residents’ resilience in the torrential rain in western Japan in 2018.
High infrastructural damages and fatalities were recorded in Okayama and Hiroshima prefecture in the torrential rain. The study conducted a web-based questionnaire from January 31 to February 12 2019, about 6 months after the torrential rain hit western Japan in 2018. Target areas were in 13 districts in Hiroshima prefecture and 6 districts in Okayama prefecture that suffered damage caused by the torrential rain. The result of the analysis of the recovery calendar (Kimura, 2005) indicated that recovery was progressed in the “disaster utopia” (up to 1.5 ~ 2 months after) and “reentry to everyday life” (up to 6 ~ 12 months after) phases (Figure 1). Next, to examine the difference in residents’ life-recovery progress up to the “disaster utopia” and “reentry to everyday life” phase, GLM analysis was implemented using count data of recovery calendar for each period. Firstly, a Bayesian GLM with Poisson distribution was conducted to predict the count data for life recovery up to the “disaster utopia” phase, with gender, age, the level of flooding damage, and human suffering as interactive terms with psychological resilience, and psychological resilience and other variables were taken as the independent variables. As a result, the main effects of gender, dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor), human suffering, and the interaction effect of age × psychological resilience were found. Concerning these effects, male residents’ life-recovery scores were higher than female residents’ (Figure 2_a). Moreover, the life recovery of residents with flooding above the floor level was lower than other residents (Figure 2_b). The more human suffering the poorer the life-recovery scores (Figure 2_c). Moreover, although older residents’ life recovery was lowest when their psychological resilience was low, older residents’ life recovery was the highest when their psychological resilience was high (Figure 2_d). Secondly, when examining changes up to the “reentry to everyday life” phase, the difference in life-recovery count data from the “disaster utopia” phase to the “reentry to everyday life” phase was calculated. In addition, a similar Bayesian GLM with Poisson distribution was conducted to predict the difference in life-recovery count data. We found the main effects of gender and the dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor), and the interaction effect of psychological resilience × the dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor). Concerning these effects, female residents’ life-recovery scores were higher than male residents (Figure 4_a). Moreover, the life-recovery scores of residents with flooding above the floor level were higher than other residents (Figure 4_b). Contrary to our expectation, the weaker the psychological resilience of residents with flooding above the floor level, the greater their tendency to perceive life recovery.
Thus, residents’ recovery from disasters differed depending on the level of damage and the time phase. The “disaster utopia” phase up to 2 months after the disaster is the stage where residents who have experienced less damage begin recovering. Even older residents or residents who have suffered serious damage are more able to overcome the adverse situation and recover soon, if they have strong psychological resilience. The “reentry to everyday life” phase up to 6 months after the disaster is the stage when residents who have experienced serious damage begin recovering. Residents with weaker resilience are more likely to engage in recovery activities during this stage. Although psychological resilience does not have a direct impact on life recovery, it may increase the pace of life recovery. The study suggests the importance of resource of the community for disaster risk management, such as residents’ resilience, in addition to the level of damage and the time phase after the disaster, to fully understand recovery.
High infrastructural damages and fatalities were recorded in Okayama and Hiroshima prefecture in the torrential rain. The study conducted a web-based questionnaire from January 31 to February 12 2019, about 6 months after the torrential rain hit western Japan in 2018. Target areas were in 13 districts in Hiroshima prefecture and 6 districts in Okayama prefecture that suffered damage caused by the torrential rain. The result of the analysis of the recovery calendar (Kimura, 2005) indicated that recovery was progressed in the “disaster utopia” (up to 1.5 ~ 2 months after) and “reentry to everyday life” (up to 6 ~ 12 months after) phases (Figure 1). Next, to examine the difference in residents’ life-recovery progress up to the “disaster utopia” and “reentry to everyday life” phase, GLM analysis was implemented using count data of recovery calendar for each period. Firstly, a Bayesian GLM with Poisson distribution was conducted to predict the count data for life recovery up to the “disaster utopia” phase, with gender, age, the level of flooding damage, and human suffering as interactive terms with psychological resilience, and psychological resilience and other variables were taken as the independent variables. As a result, the main effects of gender, dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor), human suffering, and the interaction effect of age × psychological resilience were found. Concerning these effects, male residents’ life-recovery scores were higher than female residents’ (Figure 2_a). Moreover, the life recovery of residents with flooding above the floor level was lower than other residents (Figure 2_b). The more human suffering the poorer the life-recovery scores (Figure 2_c). Moreover, although older residents’ life recovery was lowest when their psychological resilience was low, older residents’ life recovery was the highest when their psychological resilience was high (Figure 2_d). Secondly, when examining changes up to the “reentry to everyday life” phase, the difference in life-recovery count data from the “disaster utopia” phase to the “reentry to everyday life” phase was calculated. In addition, a similar Bayesian GLM with Poisson distribution was conducted to predict the difference in life-recovery count data. We found the main effects of gender and the dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor), and the interaction effect of psychological resilience × the dummy variable of flooding damage (vs. flooded above the floor). Concerning these effects, female residents’ life-recovery scores were higher than male residents (Figure 4_a). Moreover, the life-recovery scores of residents with flooding above the floor level were higher than other residents (Figure 4_b). Contrary to our expectation, the weaker the psychological resilience of residents with flooding above the floor level, the greater their tendency to perceive life recovery.
Thus, residents’ recovery from disasters differed depending on the level of damage and the time phase. The “disaster utopia” phase up to 2 months after the disaster is the stage where residents who have experienced less damage begin recovering. Even older residents or residents who have suffered serious damage are more able to overcome the adverse situation and recover soon, if they have strong psychological resilience. The “reentry to everyday life” phase up to 6 months after the disaster is the stage when residents who have experienced serious damage begin recovering. Residents with weaker resilience are more likely to engage in recovery activities during this stage. Although psychological resilience does not have a direct impact on life recovery, it may increase the pace of life recovery. The study suggests the importance of resource of the community for disaster risk management, such as residents’ resilience, in addition to the level of damage and the time phase after the disaster, to fully understand recovery.