After the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, Japanese government supplied over 50,000 units of temporary housings. And residential environment was built in temporary housing due to long-term evacuation such as new friends and places for daily use. However, residents must leave from temporary housing and this is considered to have damage for people who can not easily adapt to the environmental changes like older persons.
Under this situation, in Asto-Nagamachi area in Sendai, around eighty families relocated from the temporary housing to the three apartment of disaster public housing in a neighboring area as a group based on the community of temporary housing instead of going back to their living area before the disaster. This study focuses on the relocation process and environmental changes of the case as a community-based relocation in a neighboring area from temporary housing to disaster public housing and clarifies efficacy of the relocation method to reduce negative effects of relocation from viewpoints of the environmental transition.
In this study, we used case study approach and conducted three main surveys: 1) Interview to key persons about relocation process. 2) Questionnaire survey conducted on all residents living in three apartments of the disaster public housing, making comparison between people from the temporary housing in neighboring area and people from other places. 3) Interview to eight residents who relocated from the temporary housing about changes in their living environment, relationship with friend of the temporary housing and places kept to use.
Consequently, it can be said that this relocation methods, community-based and in neighboring area, from temporary housing to disaster public housing reduces negative effects of relocation as following reasons:
1) A good process of the relocation:
The residents participated the process of the relocation proactively, for instance, moved their small furniture and goods by themselves because the relocation is short distance (270-650m). And there were some supports such as consulting about the application and helping the moving by residents especially leaders of residents association.
2) To reduce the risk of negative effects of relocation:
People who relocated from the temporary housing had more neighbors for daily conversation, more participation in residents association than people who relocated from other places. The relocation reduces the risk of negative effects after relocations such as less social engagement and loss of the role in area community.
3) Continuing living environment in the relocation:
The residents kept to use the same surrounding facilities such as shopping stores and the hospital. Besides, they also had natural relationship with friends by chatting in the store. The meeting place in temporary housing kept open for around one year after the relocation. Some residents visited there to join some events a few times a month and to chat with stationed local officer. And They kept relationship by continuing habits in temporary housing, for example, to join radio exercise held in the park next to the disaster public housing, participate in residents' association in disaster public housing and eat lunch at friend's house.
