Model Building and Testing of Long-Term Life Recovery Processes of the Survivors of the 1995 Kobe earthquake: Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) of the 2003 Hyogo Prefecture Life Recovery Survey The 29th Annual Hazards Research and Applications Workshop, Boulder, Colorado July 14, 2004 立木茂雄（Shigeo Tatsuki, Dpt. of Sociology, Doshisha University）林春男（Haruo Hayashi, Disaster Prevention Rsearch Institute, Kyoto University）矢守克也（Katsuya Yamori, Disaster Prevention Rsearch Institute, Kyoto University ）野田隆（Takashi Noda, Faculty of Human Life and Environment, Nara Women’s University ）田村圭子（Keiko Tamura, Disaster Prevention Rsearch Institute, Kyoto University ） Research Framework of the 1999 & 2001 Life Recovery Study • The 1999 Disaster Process Study • The 2001 Panel Survey Study Life Recovery Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor Life Re-adjustment As Life is Recovered… Life Satisfaction Number of Opinion Cards for Life Recovery Category Critical Elements (1999 Grass Root Workshop Results) 600 (30.1%) 489 Ｎ＝1623 Statem ents (25.1%) 500 407 400 (12.1%) 300 197 (9.5%) (9.5%) 154 154 200 (8.5%) 138 (5.2%) 84 100 0 ① s in u Ho g ② So lT c ia ies ③ w To ④ ca ns a ep r P pe ne d e r ss n t io a it ig M & ⑤ y Ph a sic l e &M ⑥ Ec a He l n ta c mi o on lth in &F c an S ia l itu ⑦ s on i t a Re io n la t t o oG v me n r e nt Return To Framework General Linear Model of Life Recovery (2001 Survey Results) N=1203 House Damage BY House Damage BY House Damage BY Generation Gender Occupation House Damage Generation BY Occupation Generation Generation BY Occupation Occupation Generation Settled-ness ＬＩＦＥ Household Saving Household Saving Self-Governance Community Solidarity Community Participation Family Cohesion Family Adaptability ＲＥＣＯＶＥＲＹ Preparedness Communitarianism Social Desirability Local Commons Physical Stress Mental Stress P<.0001 P<..005 P<..05 P<..10 P<..20 “Life Recovery” Reconsidered • The 1999 Disaster Process Study • The 2001 Panel Survey Study • The 2003 Panel Survey Study Life Re-adjustment As Life is Recovered… Life Satisfaction What is known and trends for improving recovery and reconstruction following disasters a) there exists a need to shift the conceptualization of recovery from linear and outcome based to seeing it as an ongoing and long-term process. b) antecedent recovery studies tend to be “overly descriptive, fragmented, and short-term oriented” c) not much attention has been paid to link a disaster response phase to a recovery phase. d) more research is needed in order to understand the long-term effects of disaster recovery (Wenger, Rubin, Nigg, Berke & Bolton, 1996). Three Recovery Curve Typologies Recovered In Process Time Withdrawal Time Life Re-adjustment Life Re-adjustment Life Re-adjustment Satisfaction Satisfaction Satisfaction Time Life Change Appraisal Model EQ being a major life event New Construction Normalcy Retreat Negative Appraisal EQ not being a major life event Positive Appraisal •Berger, P.L., & Luckman, T. Social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. NY: Anchorbooks, 1966. •Frankl, V. E. Man's search for meaning. NY: Pocket Books, 1959. •Holmes, T. & Rahe, R. (1967) "Holmes-Rahe Social Readjustment Rating Scale", Journal of Psychosomatic Research, vol. II. •Lifton, R.J. Death in Life: The Survivors of Hiroshima. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1968. •Kubler-Ross, E. On Death and Dying. NY:Simon & Schuster/Touchstone,1969 Second Order Factor Analysis Results of Life Recovery Process Scales (22 Items) ２次因子空間の構造 High 1.0 ← .5 EQ Major Life Event Retreat Event Impact → Struggle for Meaning 0.0 Positive Reappraisal -.5 Return to Normalcy Low -1.0 -1.0 -.5 - ← 0.0 Event Evaluation .5 → 1.0 + Research Framework of the 2003 Life Recovery Process Study Independent Variables Dependent Variables Intervening Variables Life Recovery Critical Elements Factor Factor Exogenous Factor Factor Factor Exogenous Factor Factor Factor Exogenous Factor Factor Factor Factor Life Recovery Process Event Impact Life Recovery Outcome Life Re-adjustment Event Evaluation Life Satisfaction Proportion of Life Recovery Critical Element Category Opinions in 1999,2003 and 2004 Workshops 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 1999 Kobe City Workshop (9 wards & 3 SIG's, 1623 opinions) 2003 Kobe City Workshop (9 wards, 796 opinions) 2004 Hyogo Prefecture Workshop (5 county-level Hanshin-Awaji areas, 761 opinions) 5.0% 0.0% * n n * s y g e nt o o s d w e i n p i i i e t t n o e a i m c B v us lT ua ga so s n i t d o a r i s d t l i n i r n e e H c w o v M /l a lS s o a So W i d & To e in & nc nc oG ss t a M s e e i n e er on Fi lu dn i t p a e r & x V a e c ela i p n i e R e t m r s a o P or ge on n c m a e E m Ch m Co ＊ are new categories Model of Long-Term Life Recovery Process from the 2003 General Survey Data of the EQ Survivors Model 8 χ2=1299.727 (df=327) GFI=.924 AGFI=.905 AIC=1457.727 RMSEA=.050 .33 Gov. Help Expct e23 e22 Mutual Help e21 Self-Help d5 .51 -.28 libertarian e27 WTP for Commons e25 Communitarian -.18 e2 .79 Life Adjustment .42 Life Recovery (Outcome) d3 Major Life Event e19 .69 e7 Imbalance e10 -.14 Fam. Adaptability Imbalance .64 Civic Engagement .56 Urban Commons .24 e11 e12 e13 .47 .11 .82 .38 Housing Satisfaction .34 Housing Housing Household Finance Income -.57 Economc/Financl Stress Mngmnt Mental Stress Stress -.54 Normalcy -.45 e4 e28 e14 -.16 -.34 1.11 .38 e18 Civic-Mindedness d6 EQ EventImpact Impact Alleviated stabilized -.50 e6 .65 Struggle For Meaning -.21 -.74 .39 .29 d1 e17 Social Trust -.20 Family Cohesion Civic Community Activities Involvement Event Meaning Evaluation In Life Retreat Life Recovery .68 .47 .56 -.37 .21 Life Satisfaction .36 Rich Social Social Ties Capital e16 .59 -.41 .25 .10 e3 e9 .43 .19 Positive Reappraisa l Prospect for 1 year From now Present .11 d2 e1 e8 .67 e15 .22 e26 After EQ .73 .63 Active Citizenship/ Gov/Pub/Privt Partnership-based Disaster Partnership Reduction .25 .32 Encounter Sig. ToOther Sig. Other d7 EQ Household Damages Damage .57 .27 Physical Stress e20 House & Furniture Damage e5 Pessimistic expectations for Future Nankai-Tonankai EQ e24 Changes in Views of Government from 2001 to 2003 survey libertarian Communitarian 44.0 2001 Survey (N=1203) 2003 Survey (N=1203) 32.8 30.8 0% 20% Paternalist 40.7 40% 23.1 28.4 60% 80% 100% Conclusions • The current study aimed to develop and test causal models of long term life recovery processes among those who experienced the 1995 Kobe EQ. • Based on reviews of preceding studies in Japan and US, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was applied to the data obtained by the 2003 Hyogo Prefecture Survey on disaster survivors (N=1203). • A final SEM model provided causal chains of recovery promoting factors, recovery process and recovery outcome.