輪中地域住民の水害知覚と対策採用行動
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
The geographical study of natural hazard perception initiated in 1960s has an application-oriented character and contains these two points of argument: the grasp of the image which the occupants in the hazardous region have towards the hazard, and explanation of human behavior towards the hazard. Reviewing previous studies, we find that the image of uncertainty of hazard occurrence has been mainly discussed and that actual behavior has been seldom referred to. When the ultimate aim of the study of natural hazard perception is to explain human behavior towards the hazard, it should be pointed out that the discussion of what images are the basis of behavior has been discussed insufficiently. The purpose of this paper is to grasp the structure of the image of the natural hazard and to examine it as the basis of human behavior.This is a case study of a flood disaster in Waju. On September 12, 1976, a flood attacked the Waju-the settlements and fields surrounded by ring levees-in Gifu Prefecture. This flood is called the 9.12 disaster. It is said that the 9.12 disaster had influences on the flood control system in this region and the occupants perception of flood. For example, since this disaster, family adjustment to flood-elevation, two storied houses, insurance and the like-have been adopted. In this paper, we may assume that these adjustments result from the occupants image influenced by this flood. So, from another point of view, the purpose of this paper is to assess the impact of the so-called 9.12 disaster upon the occupants in Waju.Data is based on a questionnaire which was carried out in Wanouhi-cho in August 1980-4 years had passed since the 9.12 disaster. In order to grasp the image, the author applied a psychological technique, the Semantic Differential Method. Data are analysed by factor analysis.In the result, six rotated factors are abstracted and four of them are identified. These four explained 47.4% of the variance. These factors are identified as follows:Factor I (20.9%): Seriousness-comes from disaster or fear of disaster.Factor II (11.5%): Controllability, ability to control flooding.Factor III (8.0%): Appearance of flooding.Factor IV (7.0%): Expectancy of occurrence.The above shows that the dimension of the uncertainty of flood occurrence-expectancy-ranks fourth in significance.The author also examined the relationship between the image discussed above and the actual adjustment. As a result, it is clear that the occupants perceiving the flood hazard as more serious or more devastating are inclined to adopt adjustments.
- 人文地理学会の論文