Journal of Natural Disaster Science, Volume 28, Number 2, 2006, pp43-60

Four recovery patterns from the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake: Using the
2001-2003-2005 panel data
Akiko KUROMIYA1, Shigeo TATSUKI2, Haruo HAYASHI3, Takashi NODA4, Keiko TAMURA5 and Reo KIMURA6
1
Department of Social Work, Kibi International University
2
Department of Sociology, Doshisha University
3
Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University
4
Graduate School of Humanities and Sciences, Nara Women's University
5
Research Center for Natural Hazards and Disaster Recovery, Niigata University
6
Disaster Management Office, Nagoya University(Received for 26 May, 2006 and in revised from 13 Dec., 2006)

ABSTRACT
We examined panel data (N=297) to evaluate changes in the victim's feeling of recovery after the Great
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. Then, based on six-years data, we determined the transition pattern of the victim's
feeling of the long-term life recovery. We classified the change in the victim's feeling of life recovery into four
patterns: ++ type, +type, - type, and -- type.

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Problem
A number of large-scale natural disasters have taken placearound the world in recent years. We attempted to distinguishwhich types of process were taken and which types of social factors supported life recovery. In addition, we attempted to distinguish which types of victim were able to recover relatively early
and which types of victim needed a longer time for recovery.
Understanding the process by which victims recover from largescale disasters is valuable for providing support guidelines for
future victims.
To clarify the mechanism of victim's long-term life recovery,
it is necessary to trace changes in the victim's behavior or consciousness over a long period of time after a disaster. However it
is extremely difficult to trace victims having various attributes in alongitudinal manner.
Studies on the mechanism of victim's life recovery can beclassified into four groups. 1. Detailed ethnographic research on
victims in the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake (which clarifies the disaster process in 10, 100, and 1000 hours after the occurrence of theearthquake)1). 2. Research on qualitative and quantitative changeof the experience of victims over the 4 years following theHanshin-Awaji Earthquake by continuous observation of the same
victim examinees2). 3. Researches on long-term recovery of selfemployed workers of medium and small companies who were victims of a hurricane in the United States3，4). 4. Researches of comparison and analysis of life recovery based on large-scale social
surveys targeting victims of the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake5−9).
These studies are problematic. In Category 1, the long-term

recovery process of victims more than 1000 hours after the disasterneeds to be clarified, and in Category 2 where a four-year recovery
process was tracked, longer-term change in the victim's life recovery should be studied. The researches in Category 3 did not analyze life recovery of victims other than self-employed workers, andthe researches in Category 4 studied the victim's behavior or consciousness only at a certain time. For these reasons, the mechanism of change in the victim's long-term life recovery should beclarified.
In this study, we used the results of panel surveys10−14) as data
for analysis of the recovery mechanism. Panel surveys show temporal changes in results, since target examinees and survey questions are fixed (to a certain degree) in the surveys. For example,
victims were asked repeatedly to answer the survey questions suchas how they felt about life recovery, and this allows us to find temporal change of their feelings, i.e. how much and what type ofrecovery feeling was strengthened, and how many years it took torecover after the disaster.
Clarification of the mechanism of the long-term life recoveryof the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake victims will provide valuable
information for supporting future victims of various natural disasters around the world. In addition, clarification of the victim's
recovery mechanism prior to the occurrence of a disaster would
enable proper indications regarding which victims, in what timing,and for what reason we should start support work in the event of anatural disaster.
1. 2 Preceding studies
In a preceding study on the recovery of Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake victims, a comprehensive examination of local recovery activities in Kobe city in 1999, five years after the earthquake,

KEY WORDS: longitudinal survey, panel survey, long-term recovery, cluster analysis, four recovery patterns

44

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

revealed based on the opinions collected in citizen workshops thatthe following seven factors are necessary for the victims to achieve
life recovery from the disaster: 1. Housing, 2. Social Ties, 3.
Townscape, 4. Mind and body, 5. Preparedness, 6.Economic/financial situation, and 7.Relation to Government. This is called theSeven Life Recovery Factor Model15), referred to as the 7-criticalelement model for life recovery below.
The panel surveys of life recovery in Hyogo Prefecture, which
we used as analysis data in the present study, were conductedbased on the 7-critical element model for life recovery. The survey
started in 1999, the fifth year after the occurrence of the earthquake, and was conducted again in 2001, 2003, and 2005 (referred
to as three survey years), i.e. once every two years for ten years
after the earthquake. There have been many preceding studies5−7)on the life recovery of victims using these panel survey results.
There are also other survey researches 8，9) that used the survey
frame of the Hyogo Life Recovery Panel Surveys as a reference.
In a paper published in 2005 in the journal of the Institute ofSocial Safety Science, Kuromiya, et al.16) reported their analysis
based on the panel data collected in 2001 and 2003 in the Hyogo
Life Recovery Panel Surveys. Using a general linear model(GLM) they examined how the life recovery feeling of the victims
in 2003 was explained by preceding factors such as the degree ofdamage, life recovery feeling as of 2001, and 7 life recovery factors. They found that the 7 life recovery factors had a strong influence on the victim's life recovery feeling as of 2003.
To further clarify the mechanism of the long-term life recovery of victims, it is essential to analyze the final results of the
Hyogo Life Recovery Panel Surveys that were conducted to trace
the victims for the ten years following the disasters.
2. RESEARCH AIM
The aim of this research is to reveal the life recovery of 297
victims based on the answers obtained from the same victims in thelife recovery panel surveys that were set in each of the three survey

years. 1. First we tried to find typical patterns in the change of thevictim's life recovery feeling. 2. Then we examined social factorsthat correlated with each change pattern of the life recovery feeling, taking account of the longitudinal panel data characteristics.
To be more specific, we analyzed the results of the Hyogo
Life Recovery Panel Surveys made in the three survey years, andextracted the data of the 297 victims observed in each survey year,
in order to identify temporal change of their life recovery processes. We clarified how the victim's life recovery feeling changed
through these survey years, and how the victim's attitude, recognition, attributes (sex, generation, occupation), and damage (tohouse) in the 7 personal life recovery factors affected the temporalchange of the life recovery feeling.
3. METHOD
3.1 Research outline
In this study, we used the results of the Hyogo Life Recovery
Panel Surveys from three survey years. This information was used
for examination of the victim's life recovery and for future disaster
control, and future measures and policies for recovery and reconstruction.
The panel survey covered the whole area of Kobe City, otherareas in South Hyogo, outside Kobe, that experienced a level 7
earthquake on the Japanese earthquake scale, and areas where thegas supply was stopped. The examinees of the survey were maleand female adults living in these areas and we employed the stratified 2-stage sampling method, with which we selected ten examinees in each of 330 research sites. Sampling with probability proportional to size was performed on the Basic Resident Register,and 3,300 samples were taken from the three surveys.
As shown in Fig. 1, 1,203 samples were selected in the panel
survey in 2001 (with a collection rate of 42.1%), among which 486
people agreed to participate in the survey.
In the panel survey in 2003, 364 out of the 486 people who

Fig. 1 Outline of panel survey

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

participated in the survey in 2001 agreed to participate again. In
the panel survey in 2005, a total of 297 people who participated in
the preceding surveys in 2001 and 2003 agreed to participate again
and answered the questions.
We analyzed the survey results of the 297 people who agreed
to participate in the panel survey in 2001 and continued to participate in the successive surveys in 2003 and 2005.
3.2 Frame of panel analysis
From the panel sample data of the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake
victims obtained in 2001, 2003, and 2005, i.e. in the sixth, eighth,and tenth years from the occurrence of the earthquake, we examined how victim's consciousness or attitude changed, how victim's
life recovery feeling changed through the three survey years, what
type of victim had better or worse life recovery feelings, andwhether there is a specific pattern in the temporal change of the life
recovery feeling of victims of various attributes.
We also examined how the change of their life recovery was
influenced by the victim's basic attributions, the degree of damage
to their house in the earthquake, and their recognition or attitude to
the 7 life recovery factors.
Fig. 2 shows an image of the panel analysis in the present
study. The panel respondents provided their information in thethree surveys. They answered the same questions on the induced
variable, ife recovery feeling, repeatedly in the surveys. We
clarified how the attributes or housing damage that the victims suffered in 1995, when the earthquake took place, affected the temporal change of their life recovery feeling observed in the three survey years. We also investigated how the temporal change of victim's life recovery feeling reflected the change of the victim's attitude toward the 7 life recovery factors (e.g. Social Ties or
Townscape) through the five years from 2001 to 2005, i.e. the sixth
to tenth year since the earthquake, and investigated how the temporal change of the life recovery feeling reflected attributes, such as
occupation, that the victims had in 2001.

45

3.3 Measurement of life recovery feeling
The life recovery feeling was measured based on analysis of
the data collected in the Hyogo Life Recovery Panel Surveys in
1999, 2001, and 2003. The life recovery feeling was characterizedusing three sub-indices: (i) the recovery of daily activity, (ii) Lifesatisfaction and quality of life, (iii) optimistic/pessimistic prospects
for the next year.
Questions were set on each of the three sub-indices.
Regarding (i) the recovery of daily activity, 7 questions were set on
the following items: Busy and active daily life, significance in what
you are doing, good relationships with people around you, enjoying
daily life, thinking that your future is bright, being healthy andactive, and work that you have to do. There were 5 choices toselect: From 1. Much increased to 5. Much decreased.
Regarding (ii) Life satisfaction and quality of life, 6 questions were
set on the following items: Daily life, health, human relationships,
current husbandry, home life, and job. Again, there were 5 choices
to select: 1. I'm not satisfied at all to 5. Yes, I'm very satisfied.
Regarding (iii) Prospects for the next year, there was one question
set: Do you think that your life will be better next year? To thequestion, there were 5 choices to select: From 1. Yes, it will bemuch better to 5. No, it will be much worse.
The total score for the life recovery feeling was calculated bysumming every answer score for the 14 questions, i.e. 7 questionsfor (i) the recovery of daily activity, 6 questions for (ii) Life satisfaction and quality of life, and 1 question for (iii) optimistic/pessimistic prospects for the next year. The induced variable and thequestion items are listed in the following table (Table 1).s
3.4 Measurement of the victim's basic attributes and thedegree of damage to their house
We used attributes such as sex, generation, occupation, anddamage (damage to house). In the final analysis, the house damage
was characterized by 4 categories: 1. Completely destroyed orcompletely burned down, 2. Half destroyed or half burned down, 3.
Partially destroyed, and 4. No damage.

Fig. 2 Analysis frame of panel survey (Schematic diagram)

46

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

Table 1. List of question items for life recovery feeling

Table 2. Measurement of life recovery factors (7 life recovery factors)

3.5 Measurement of life recovery factors
Explanatory variables that were considered to have someinfluence on the life recovery feeling are listed in Table 2. We
here explain them in the order of the 7 life recovery factors.
(1) Housing
Resident status (owned house, owned apartment, private rental
apartment, public housing) was asked about.
(2) Social Ties
To reveal social ties, we used 8 question items on social reliability, 13 items on recognition of civic mindedness, and 2 items onfamily relationships. The social reliability scale proposed by
Yamagishi17) was used for the 8 items on social reliability such as
basically, most people are honest, I tend to trust other people,
or people around me take advantage of me [contrary question].
(To each question there were two answers to select: 1. I think so, or
2. I don't think so.) The score for social reliability was determinedby the first major item score based on the optimal scale method.
Eight items were used to ask about being a citizen. They werechosen to measure the degree to which each citizen was self-rulingfrom the two viewpoints of autonomy and solidarity. We used
the optimal scale method for these 8 question items but failed toseparate the two components, autonomy and solidarity. So, weused the first major item score as an index of being a citizen(autonomy and solidarity).
For family cohesion and adaptability, Tatsuki 18) used 8
Thurstone Scale items (FACESKGIV-16 Version2) to express thedegree of family bonds or family steering, based on a circumplex
model of the family system. It is assumed in the model that family
relationships are the most functional when family bonds and family
steering are both at a moderate level. So, we calculated the sum ofsquared deviation from the answers and used it as the index of family relationships (bond and steering). (Family relationships are less

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

functional with a larger sum of squared deviation.)(3) Townscape
As a life recovery factor, townscape affects the citizen's
activity characteristic, influencing how citizens themselves participate in the town community. Its major elements include actual
neighborhood development (e.g. neighborly companionship) andpractice of local activities (e.g. participating in town activities ororganizing activities). For townscape, questions were set on the
degree of the citizen's awareness of urban commons (e.g. richgreenery, nice parks, pleasant cityscape, etc.)
The optimal scale method was used to calculate a composite
score for neighborly companionship and local activities from the
4 question items on neighborhood development and 6 items on participation in local activities.
For attachment to town , we used the optimal scale method
to obtain a standardized composite score, and used it as a score forawareness of urban commons (feeling of sharing a town towhich citizens are deeply attached).
(4) Mind and body
For the index of mind and body, questions on humandamage were set, asking if victims or their family were injured,
became ill, or died in the earthquake disaster.
Six question items were set on victim's mental state in the last
one month ( I feel nervous, I feel lonely, I feel depressed, I
always think negatively, I can't concentrate, and I don't haveenergy to do anything ). Also, 6 items were set on their physicalstress ( I have palpitations, I have shortness of breath, I haveheadaches or a stuffy head, I have a tight, painful feeling in mychest, I feel dizzy, and I have a dry throat ). In response to
the questions, there were 5-point Likert-scale answers to select:
From 1. No, I don't have it to 5. Yes, I always have it. We
calculated the total score for each question item and used it as theindex of mental stress and physical stress.
(5) Preparedness
Questions on preparedness were set with 4 themes (rules for
putting out garbage, local activities, protecting citizen's lives fromdisaster, and town development) to ask about people's consciousness of being prepared against disasters. Respondents selected oneof three answers: We should entrust the government with preparation, We should place priority on freedom and rights, and We
should place priority on resident's autonomy. With the optimal
scale method, we found that the republican characteristic where
people gave priority to the self-ruling of citizens gained the firstmajor item score. We therefore used the score as the index of
republican self-ruling or preparation.
(6) Economic/Financial Situation
For living conditions, a question was set on household income
with three answer choices: Income increased, did not change,or decreased due to the earthquake. This answer was used as anindex of living conditions (household income).
(7) Relation to Government
The index of individual payment for public goods(Willingness to Pay) was used. Victims were asked how muchthey were prepared to pay for the maintenance of parks in theneighborhood, local events such as festivals and athletics meetings,
and activities of the local community. Based on the collected
answers, we made frequency distribution data and classified theminto three categories: 0 yen, 999 yen or less, and 1,000 yen or

47

more. This data was used as an index representing relation toGovernment.
4. PANEL ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Panel samples and general samples: Study on attribution
dependency
Kitamura10) pointed out that the actual problem in panel surveys was the fact that, as the survey was conducted repeatedly, thenumber of survey samples decreased and hence a distorted correlation among samples could appear, compared with the sample population collected in the first survey.
We therefore compared a fraction of 297 respondent samplesof various attributes to that of general samples in 2001, 2003, and2005. It is important to obtain basic information such as the attributes of the 297 respondents. The items used in the comparison
were 1. Sex, 2. Generation, 3. Occupation, and 4. Housing damage.
In the following, we show the results of the comparison foreach attribute between 297 panel respondents and general respondents in the three surveys.
The panel respondents (N=297) of the research target hadoverall characteristics such as: 1. Sex: There were more male
respondents than female respondents. 2. Generation: There were
few people in their twenties at the time of the earthquake, while
there were a number of the victims who were in their fifties or sixties. 3. Housing damage: Many respondents had their houses completely destroyed or burned down. We show below sample proportions of each attribution.
(1) Sex
With regard to sex, we found no statistically significant difference between the panel respondents (N=297) and general respondents in 2001 (N=1,203) (χ2=2.598, df=1, N. S) or those in 2003
(N=1,203) (χ2=1.439, df=1, N. S). However, the comparison withthe general respondents in 2005 (N=1,028) showed a statisticallysignificant difference (χ2=5.152, df=1, P< .05).
As shown in Fig. 3, male respondents comprised 51.5% of thepanel respondents but only 44.1% of the general respondents in2005. Female respondents comprised 48.5% of the panel respondents while they comprised 55.9% of the general respondents. We
thus found that there were slightly more males than females in thepanel respondents.
(2) Generation
With regard to generation, there were statistically significant
differences in the comparison of the panel respondents (N=297)
with the general respondents in 2001 (N=1,203) (χ2=25.930, df=5,
P< .01), with those in 2003 (N=1,203) (χ2=16.925, df=5, P< .01),
and with those in 2005 (N=1028) (χ2=19.709, df=5, P< .01).
As shown in Fig. 4, there were fewer panel respondents at theage of 29 or younger than general respondents in the same generation, while there were more panel respondents in their fifties or sixties than in the general respondents in the same generations.
(3) Occupation
With regard to occupation, we found a statistically significant
difference between the panel respondents (N=297) and the general
respondents in 2001 (N=1,203) (χ2=18.620, df=9, P< .05).
However, there was no statistically significant difference found in
the comparison with those in 2003 (N=1,203) (χ2=7.914, df=9, N.

48

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

Fig. 3. Comparison of sex proportion between panel respondents and general respondents of 2001, 2003 and 2005.

Fig. 4. Comparison of generation proportion between panel respondents and general respondents of 2001, 2003 and 2005.

S) or with those in 2005 (N=1,028) (χ2=11.309, df=9, N. S).
It was characteristic that the proportion of those who had nojob or received pensions was high in the panel respondents(37.2%). (See Fig. 5.)(4) Housing damage
With regard to housing damage, there were statistically significant differences in the comparison of the panel respondents(N=297) with the general respondents in 2001 (N=1,203) (χ2=9.059, df=3, P< .05), with those in 2003 (N=1,203) (χ2=8.324,
df=3, P< .05), and with those in 2005 (N=1,028) (χ2=12.195,
df=3, P< .01).
Those who had their houses completely destroyed or burned
down comprised 22.9% of the panel respondents, which is a higher
proportion compared to the general respondents. There were many

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

49

Fig. 5. Comparison of occupation proportion between panel respondents and general respondents of 2001, 2003 and 2005.

Fig. 6. Comparison of occupation proportion between panel respondents and general respondents of 2001, 2003 and 2005.

panel respondents who had relatively major damage to their houses. (See Fig. 6.)
4.2 Score distribution of life recovery feeling in 2001, 2003 and2005
To identify the overall tendency of the life recovery feeling of

the 297 panel respondents, we compared the score distributions
obtained in the 2001 survey, 2003 survey and 2005 survey. (SeeFig. 7.)To be more specific, we calculated the scores of the answers
to the 14 questions on the life recovery feeling in every survey andused them as each year's life recovery feeling scores to broadly

50

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

Fig. 7 Score distribution of life recovery feeling in three surveys

Fig. 8 Four life recovery change patterns in the three surveys (N=297)

reveal how the scores of the 297 panel respondents changed
through the three surveys.
We found no statistically significant difference in the averagescores of the life recovery feeling in the three surveys (using oneway analysis of variance in the repeated measurements (F(2,297)=0.505, NS)). In other words, the average score for the life
recovery feeling did not change through the three surveys.
Next we made two-step analysis: 1. Was there any change inthe pattern of the life recovery feeling of the 297 victims throughthe three surveys? 2. To what extent did the life recovery feelingfactors have a direct correlation with the change pattern? Based on
this analysis, we tried to clarify the life recovery mechanism of thevictims.
4.3 Four typical patterns in the change of life recovery feeling:
Characterization of life recovery feeling patterns with cluster analysis
We made detailed analysis of the score change of the life
recovery feeling of the 297 panel respondents, and looked for typical patterns of the change by examining what type of victims had

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

51

Fig. 9 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between sex and the 4 recovery patterns

their life recovery feeling strengthened or weakened through theyears 2001, 2003, and 2005.
To determine typical patterns of the score change, we performed cluster analysis (analysis to find respondents who gave
similar answers) of the change in the scores of the life recovery
feeling that were found in the respondent's answers. Cluster analysis is an analysis method for finding typical change patterns of similar answers. For example, respondents who had a strong life
recovery feeling in the three surveys in 2001, 2003, and 2005, wereclassified as a pattern of strong life recovery. On the other hand,those who had very weak life recovery feeling were classified as apattern of weak life recovery. We thus used cluster analysis toclassify the score change of the life recovery feeling in the sixth,
eighth, and tenth year since the earthquake, and determined thelong-term recovery pattern of the victims.
In the cluster analysis according to the Ward method usingsquared Euclidean distance, the change of the life recovery feelingof the 297 victims could be clearly classified into the four typical
patterns of life recovery feeling as shown in Fig. 9.
By examining the average score change, we found four significantly different patterns in the change of the victim's life recovery
feeling during the period from the sixth to the tenth year since theearthquake (in the one-way analysis of variance in the repeatedmeasurements (F (3,293)=458.287, P< .01)).
Detailed analysis of each pattern indicates a major characteristic that the change patterns of the life recovery feeling do not intersect with each other and exhibited stable scores in the series of surveys. Namely, the victim's life recovery feeling was maintainedwith the average score showing stable behavior during the period
from the sixth to the tenth year since the earthquake. Victims who
had a relatively strong life recovery feeling (stronger by more than
+1 standard deviation or stronger than the average) in the sixth year
since the earthquake, also had a strong life recovery feeling in thetenth year. On the other hand, victims who had a relatively weaklife recovery feeling in the sixth year, also had a weaker recovery
feeling than the others in the tenth year. These results suggest that,by examining the life recovery scores as of 2001, the sixth year

Table 3. Four life recovery change patterns and relevant factors (Summaryof cross tabulation)

since the earthquake, the life recovery feeling of the victims can bepredicted for subsequent years.
We call the four patterns Type ++,Type +,
Type -,and Type --, respectively in descending order of the life recovery scores.
4.4 Victim's attributes, damage to house, and 7 life recovery
factors in the 4 change patterns
Next, we analyzed typical victims in each life recovery change
pattern by making a cross tabulation. Table 3 shows the results ofthe tabulation.
The factors relevant to the 4 change patterns of the life recovery feeling were sex and occupation (in 2001 and 2005) of theattributes. With regard to damage, human damage and damage

52

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

to household belongings were found to be relevant. Among the 7life recovery factors, resident status (as of 2005) of the housing
index, civic mindedness and social trust of the social ties
index, awareness of urban commons of the townscape index,
physical stress and mental stress of the mind and body index,
and household income (in 2005) and harm to work place in theearthquake damage of the economic/financial situation index
were relevant to the 4 change patterns of the life recovery feeling.
On the other hand, we found no relevance of the factors preparedness or relation to government to the patterns. This isprobably because consciousness regarding preparation against disaster became relatively low in the long-term recovery process ofvictims. Also, the irrelevancy of the relation to government might
be explained by considering that the victim's consciousness of paying money for various civic amenities in their lives had become
lower than that shortly after the earthquake. We consider that thefactors closely related to the lives of the victims in the long-term
are relevant to the 4 change patterns of the life recovery feeling.
In the following, we show the results of the cross tabulation
analysis with typical factors that were found relevant to the 4 life
recovery feeling change patterns.
(1) Attributions: Relation of sex and occupation with the 4 recovery patterns
We found a strong correlation between sex and the 4 change
patterns of the life recovery feeling (χ2=13.87, df=3, P< .01).
There were more females (62.5%) than males in Type ++ of therecovery pattern, while there were more males (70.8%) thanfemales in Type -- (Fig. 9). The high proportion of males in Types-- and - could be because the percentage of those having a job was
higher among males than among females.
We also found a strong relevance between occupation and theFig. 10 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between occupation and the 4 recovery patterns

Fig. 11 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between damage to household belongings and the 4 recovery patterns

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

4 life recovery feeling patterns (χ2=38.03, df=21, P< .01). The
study on the correlation between victim's occupation as of 2001
and the 4 recovery patterns showed that housewives (33.3%) andclerical jobs or sales persons (12.5%) dominated in Type ++, managers (18.1%) dominated in Type +, and independent business persons (12.5%) dominated in commerce or industry and workers inservice sectors (14.1%) dominated in Type --. (See Fig. 10.) In
other words, the number of victims who had jobs in the local disaster areas was relatively high in Type --.
(2) Damage: Relation of damage to household belongings withthe 4 recovery patterns
We found a certain correlation between the degree of earthquake damage to household belongings and the 4 change patternsof the life recovery feeling (χ2=16.36, df=9, P< .1).
Those who had household belongings damaged in the earthquake were mostly found in Type -- (21.5%). As the victims had a
special feeling for the belongings, damage to household belongings
had a major influence on human damage and showed a strong correlation with the 4 recovery patterns (Fig. 11).
(3) 7 life recovery feeling factors: Relations of 7 life recovery
feeling factors with the 4 recovery patterns(i) Residential status (Relation of residential status with the 4
recovery patterns)
We found a significant statistical relevance between residential status as of 2005 and the 4 change patterns of the life recovery
feeling (χ2=37.78, df=21, P< .01).
The proportion of victims who lived in public housing was relatively high (12.5%) in Type --, compared to the other types, while
the proportion of those who lived in an owned house on owned
land was high (75.8%) in Type ++. There could have been many
victims who had lived in public housing before the earthquake andhad to move to other places after the disaster. This indicates that
housing was an important factor in the life recovery. (See Fig. 12.)(ii) Civic Mindedness (Relation of civic mindedness, an index ofhuman connections, with the 4 recovery patterns)

53

We found a strong correlation between the change in the consciousness of civic mindedness from 2001 to 2005 and the 4change patterns of the life recovery feeling (χ2=23.17, df=9, P<.01). The proportion of the victims who had an autonomous character cooperating with others (i.e. who had a stronger character as
citizens) was high in Type ++, while the proportion of those who
had a weaker character as citizens was high in Type --. (See Fig.
13.)(iii) Awareness of Urban Commons (Relation of awareness ofawareness of urban commons, an index of townscape, withthe 4 recovery patterns)
We found a certain correlation between the change in theawareness of civic amenities from 2001 to 2005 and the 4 change
patterns of the life recovery feeling (χ2=19.78, df=9, P< .05).
The proportion of the victims who had a special feeling forshared goods (urban commons) in a town was high in Type ++,while the proportion of those who did not have such special feelingwas high in Type --. In other words, those who had strong pride in
their town because of nice parks, cityscape that they liked, places
where everyone gathered, etc, were mostly found in the pattern
type of positive life recovery feeling (Fig. 14).
(iv) Mental stress (Relation of mental stress, an index of mind andbody with the 4 recovery patterns)
We found a strong correlation between the change in mental
stress from 2001 to 2005 and the 4 change patterns of the life
recovery feeling (χ2=58.50, df=9, P< .001).
The proportion of victims who had constantly high mental andphysical stress in the period from 2001 to 2005 was high in Type -(Fig. 15). Those who could relieve their stress were mostly foundin Type ++ or Type +. This indicates a strong relevancy between
victim's stress and the long-term change of the life recovery feeling.
(v) Change of household income (Relation of the change inhousehold income in 2005, an index of living conditions, withthe 4 recovery patterns)

Fig. 12 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between residential status as of 2005 and the four recovery patterns

54

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

We found a strong correlation between the change in household income and the 4 change patterns of the life recovery feeling(χ2=58.50, df=9, P< .01).
The proportion of the victims who answered that their household income as of 2005 increased after the earthquake was high in
Type ++, while the proportion of those who answered that theirincome decreased was high in Type -- (Fig. 16). Change in household income after the earthquake had a strong relevancy to the 4life recovery feeling patterns, as it was an important, basic factor in
victim's lives.

The above analysis of the panel survey reveals the life recovery process of the victims, which is summarized in Fig. 17. The
figure, a summary of the analysis results, presents an image of thevictims in each typical pattern of the life recovery feeling.
5. MEASURES FOR VICTIMS IN THE LIFERECOVERY PATTERN TYPE The aim of this study was to clarify the mechanism of thelong-term life recovery of the victims and observe what type of

Fig. 13 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between the change in the consciousness of civic mindedness from2001 to 2005 and the four recovery patterns

Fig. 14 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between the change in the awareness of urban commons from 2001 to
2005 and the four recovery patterns

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

55

Fig. 15 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between the change in mental stress from 2001 to 2005 and the four recovery patterns

Fig. 16 Results of cross tabulation analysis on the relation between the change in household income and the four recovery patterns

victims had difficulty in the recovery. Based on this study we
could prepare appropriate, effective long-term support plans for theearthquake victims.
The results of the analysis show that long-term support measures are necessary in particular for victims of Type -- who had thelowest scores of the life recovery feeling in the three surveys.
Examining the between-class variation of the 4 life recovery
feeling change patterns, we found that the average life recovery
feeling score for 65 victims of Type -- fell in the period from 2001
to 2003 (P< .01) but stopped falling in the period from 2003 to2005 (N.S). (See Fig. 18 and Table 4.)
The fact that the average score stopped falling in the period
from 2003 to 2005 indicates that some victims of Type -- had theirlife recovery feeling strengthened and some had it weakened in thisperiod. What stopped the fall in the life recovery feeling score?
We used one-way analysis of variance in the repeated measurements to find the cause of the different effects (interaction effects)
among the victims in the time variance.
The analysis reveals the following causes that stopped the fallof the life recovery feeling score for the Type -- victims.
(i) The number of times the person changed house after theearthquake : The victims of Type -- who changed house after
the earthquake 0, 2, or 3 times as of 2001 had a life recovery
feeling score at the same level or slightly enhanced in the period
from 2003 to 2005. On the other hand, those who changed
house 4 times as of 2001 had a dramatically lower life recovery

56

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

Fig. 17 Image of victims in the four life recovery feeling change patterns (Summary)Fig. 18 Change of average score for each recovery pattern (Between-class variation)

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

57

Table 4. Between-class variation of life recovery feeling of Type -- victims in the three surveys (From one-way analysis of variance in repeated measurements)

Fig. 19

Number of times of changing house of Type -- victims after the disaster, and change of average scores of the life recovery feeling through the three surveys

Table 5. The influence of the number of times of changing house after the earthquake on the life recovery feeling of Type -- victims (Between-class variation: one-way analysis of variation in the repeated measurements)

feeling score in the period from 2003 to 2005. (See Fig. 19 andTable 5.) Type -- victims who changed house 5 times as of2001 had the lowest score for the life recovery feeling in the
period from 2003 to 2005. This suggests that the number oftimes of changing house in the first five years after the earthquake could have a major influence on the long-term life recovery feeling in the period of the eighth to tenth year since the disaster.
(ii) Participation in local activities : Victims of Type -- who
answered in the 2001 survey that they sometimes, or often, par-ticipated in local events had a stronger life recovery feeling in
the period from 2003 to 2005. Those who answered in 2001
that they seldom participated in local events had a weaker life
recovery feeling in the period from 2003 to 2005. (See Fig. 20
and Table 6.)(iii) Local town environment : The victims who answered in the2001 survey that everyone lived an independent life with little
communication with others had a weaker life recovery feelingin the period from 2003 to 2005. On the other hand, those who
answered that people in town had frequent interactions with58

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

Fig. 20

Participation of Type -- victims in local events after the disaster, and change of averagescores of the life recovery feeling through the three surveys

Table 6. The influence of participating in local events on the life recovery feeling of Type -- victims (Between-class variation: one-way analysis of variation in the repeated measurements)

each other and joined local activities had a stronger life recovery feeling in the period from 2003 to 2005. (See Fig. 21 andTable 7.)
The above results suggest that the life recovery feeling ofType -- victims was backed up by living in a fixed place with nofrequent change of house after the earthquake, having an environment that promoted participation in local events, or having local
interaction with other people as seen in the answer people in town
interacted with each other or people greeted each other, notjust participating in local activities.
It is possible to make a rough prediction of the future longterm change pattern of the victim's life recovery feeling, based on
the characteristics in the sixth year since the earthquake. To dothis, it is necessary to extract the victims of Type -- by using the 4life recovery feeling patterns of the victims found in this study.
Stable residential status is particularly important for the victims ofType --. Furthermore, not only measures for individual victims but
also measures taking advantage of the local community's potential

for life recovery would be effective for long-term support of thevictims.
6. FUTURE WORKSIn the present study, we clarified the mechanism of the life
recovery feeling of victims based on panel survey data. We consider it necessary to track quantitatively and qualitatively victim's
life recovery process after disaster in other disaster-stricken areas.
The results of the panel survey of the victims that we usedprovide valuable information not only for Japan but also for the
rest of the world. In addition to the present analysis, we shouldmake deeper analysis, for example by trying a descriptive expression method following the individual survey answers or by constructing a life recovery model based on a causal model covering
multiple surveys. Based on the analysis, we would like to prepare
information to support victims in other disaster areas.

FOUR RECOVERY PATTERNS FROM THE HANSHIN-AWAJI EARTHQUAKE: USING THE 2001-2003-2005 PANEL DATA

Fig. 2159

Attitude of Type -- victims toward the town environment after the disaster, and changeof average scores of the life recovery feeling through the three surveys

Table 7. The influence of attitude toward the town environment on the life recovery feeling of Type -- victims (Between-class variation: one-way analysis
of variation in the repeated measurements)

REFERENCES
1) K. Shigekawa: Disaster process from viewpoints of victims and aid
providers - Problems of city disaster prevention system found in
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, November 20, 1997, Architectural
Institute of Japan (in Japanese).
2) K. Tsuji: Disaster process and recovery process - Short note on the
Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, (Koyo Shobo, 2001) (in Japanese).
3)Webb, G., Tierney, K.,& Dahlhamar, J: Businesses and Disasters:
Empirical Patterns and Unanswered Question. Natural Hazards
Review, pp.83-90, 2000.
4)Daniel J Alesh: Increasing The Probability of small Business Recovery
From Urban Earthquakes, Proceedings of the 6th Japan/United States
Workshop on Urban Earthquake Hazard Reduction, pp.525-528, 1999.
5) K. Tamura, et al.: Study on 7 life recovery factors in the Hanshin-Awaji
Earthquake - Recovery survey report 2001 of Disaster Prevention
Research Institute Kyoto University--, Journal of Institute of Social

Safety Science, No. 3, pp.33-40, 2001 (in Japanese).
6)Tatsuki,S.&Hayashi,H.：Seven critical element model of life recovery;General Linear Model analysis of the 2001 Kobe panel survey data.
Proceedings of 2nd Workshop for Comparative Study Urban
Earthquake Disaster Management, pp.23-28, 2002.
7) S. Tatsuki, et al.: Modeling and study of the long-term life recovery
process in the Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake: Application of structure
equation modeling (SEM) to the Hyogo recovery survey data in 2003,
Journal of Institute of Social Safety Science, No. 6, pp.251-260, 2004
(in Japanese).
8) K. Koshiyama, et al.: Analysis of recovery feeling of residents in disaster
restoration public houses, Journal of Institute of Social Safety Science,
No. 5, pp.237-244, 2003 (in Japanese).
9) A. Kuromiya and S. Tatsuki: Qualitative and quantitative study on"Kobe, now" in view of the ten years since the earthquake -Based on
the workshops and social surveys--, Journal of Institute of Social
Safety Science, No. 6, pp.261-267, 2004 (in Japanese).

60

A KUROMIYA, S TATSUKI, H HAYASHI, T NODA, K TAMURA AND R KIMURA

10) Y. Kitamura: Panel data analysis, Economic research report ofHitotsubashi University, 2004 (in Japanese).
11) Y. Higuchi and M. Iwata (ed.): Recent women viewed from panel data Marriage, childbirth, career, consumption, money saving--, Toyo
Keizai Inc., 1999 (in Japanese).
12) Y. Higuchi, Dynamism of household income behavior in Japan, Keio
University Press, 2005 (in Japanese).
13) K. Yamaguchi: Difficulty in social survey from the viewpoint of theUnited States (<Special issue> Social survey: Overcoming the difficulty), Shakaigaku Hyoron, No. 53(4), pp.552-565, 2003 (inJapanese).
14) K. Yamaguchi: Advantage of panel data and its analysis method -Errors
in common sense-, Kakei Keizai Kenkyu, No.62, pp.50-58, 2004 (inJapanese).
15) S. Tatsuki and H. Hayashi: Comprehensive study of citizen's life recovery with TQM method -Detailed examination and overview of life
recovery--, Toshi-Seisaku, 104, pp.123-141, 2001 (in Japanese).
16) A. Kuromiya, et al.: Restoration of Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake victims
viewed from panel data -Based on Hyogo Life Recovery Panel
Surveys in 2001 and 2003, Journal of Institute of Social Safety
Science, No. 7 pp.375-383, 2005 (in Japanese).
17) T. Yamagishi: Structure of credibility -Evolution game of mind andsociety--, University of Tokyo Press, 1998 (in Japanese).
18) S. Tatsuki: Theoretical and experimental study on family systems Examination of the validity of Olson's circumplex model--,Kawashima Shoten, 1999 (in Japanese).