The socio-economic features and issues of the calamities of buildings and housing sites in the Great East Japan Earthquake

<p>The Great East Japan Earthquake disaster comprised the earthquake， the tsunami damage， the nuclear power generation accident and the economic damage caused by the spread of rumors associated with the latter. The earthquake caused a lot of building damage and site collapse. Architects， civil engineering scholars and geologists are mainly investigating these events， but there is not much investigation by social scientists from the social perspective. In this research， the socio-economic features of the building damage and housing site collapses are clarified. Particular features and issues for which examination is needed are as follows.</p><p>Detailed investigation of building damages is not being conducted at the present. In J apan earthquake-resistant criteria were revised following the earthquake off the coast of Miyagi Prefecture in 1981. For buildings built before 1981， the Sendai city office had offered subsidies in order to stimulate earthquake-proof construction. It is necessary to clarify the inf1uence of this policy given the events of March 11， 2011.</p><p>On housing sites developed before the application of the law concerning disaster prevention of land developed for housing lots， many landslides and fissures occurred. These were on mainly housing sites developed during the period rapid economic growth before 1973. The law about disaster prevention of land developed for housing lots had not been legislated during this period. Further， the law has not been applied since its enactment in 1981. It is necessary to clarify the reason for the delay in its application. Has it been a problem of construction technology or have there been certain political or economic reasons?</p><p>In the residential section which suffered a great deal of damage， population reduction and the increasing aging of residents were seen from before the occurrence of this earthquake. Therefore， problems concerning living environments， such as the reduction in the number of stores， the maintenance difficulty of public facilities， and the reduction in public traffic had arisen there previously. These problems cannot be solved solely by the recovery of the ground. In reality， a further decrease in population is expected in the recovered section. Furthermore， it is also likely that the problem of the living environment in the area will worsen as well. It is necessary to consider not only the space recovery but the habitation of the whole metropolitan area in the solution of these residential areas.</p>