À©ÅÙ¹½ÃÛ¤ÎÀ¯¼£·ÐºÑ³Ø¡Ý´üÂԼ¸½¼Ò²ñ¤Ë¸þ¤±¤Æ¡Ý
English
GLOPEII¤Ë¤Ä¤¤¤Æ News ¥¤¥Ù¥ó¥È¥¹¥±¥¸¥å¡¼¥ë ¥ï¡¼¥­¥ó¥°¥Ú¡¼¥Ñ¡¼ GLOPE II À¤ÏÀÄ´ºº°ìÍ÷ ¥ê¥ó¥¯

ͽÄêɽ -¾ÜºÙ¾ðÊó-

·ï̾ WS¡¡ÇÏÆàÌÚ½Ó²ð»á
³«»ÏÆü»þ 2013ǯ 1·î 30Æü (¿åÍËÆü)   16»þ30ʬ (GMT+09:00)
½ªÎ»Æü»þ 2013ǯ 1·î 30Æü (¿åÍËÆü)   18»þ00ʬ (GMT+09:00)
¾ì½ê 1¹æ´Û¸½À¯¸¦²ñµÄ¼¼
¾ÜºÙ ¡ÚÊó¹ð¼Ô¡ÛÇÏÆàÌÚ½Ó²ð¡ÊÅìËÌÂç³Ø¡¡½Ú¶µ¼ø¡Ë
¡ÚÊó¹ð¥¿¥¤¥È¥ë¡ÛResidential Choice of Disaster Refugee and Cohesiveness of Their Communities
¡Ú¾ì½ê¡Û1¹æ´Û¸½À¯¸¦²ñµÄ¼¼

¡Ú³µÍסÛ
¡¡After Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami on March the 11th, there is continuous immigration from the devastated three prefectures (Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima) to the prefectures outside these three. Because the growth theory tells us that a decrease in population has negative impact on the economic growth, it can be said that the disaster area has been experiencing the second shock from the earthquake and tsunami, and the government may have to prepare some remedy for this serious problem. However, the unemployment rates in the three prefectures have not shown a dramatic decrease in employment rate. In other words, the income opportunities for the refugees can be almost the same but refugees immigrate nonetheless. To answer this question, we take advantage of a survey with 1511 respondents, we created several variables to decompose the refugees' preferences into three components, which are the one over risk of potential disaster, the one over the connections to their communities, and the one with expected future income. The results from random utility model show that the magnitude of the impact of refugees¡Ç cohesiveness¡Ç to their communities is greater than other two. The implication is that the refugees stay their residence although there is still the negative relationship between the expected future income and probability of immigration because there are sunk costs of leaving their communities.
¥«¥Æ¥´¥ê¡¼ À¯¼£·ÐºÑ³Ø´ðÁÃ¥»¥ß¥Ê¡¼¡¦¥é¥ó¥Á¥¿¥¤¥à¥»¥ß¥Ê¡¼
¥µ¥¤¥È¥Þ¥Ã¥×
Home¤Ø