Questionnaire Survey on the Difficulty of Attending Work for Commuters

https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2020.p0212 Hiroi, U et al.

Paper: Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

UHiroi∗, Naoya Sekiya∗∗, Shuntarou Waragai∗∗∗, and Fusae Kukihara∗∗∗

∗Department of Urban Engineering, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan ∗∗Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan ∗∗∗Social Information Department, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan [Received September 6, 2019; accepted November 25, 2019]

This paper presents the results of a questionnaire sur- dangers inherent in outdoor urban spaces, such as dam- vey conducted on those who had difficulty commut- age due to the collapse of concrete block walls, but it also ing after the 2018 Osaka earthquake. As with the created a situation where many people found it difficult Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, serious traffic con- to commute to work or school due to the suspension of gestion occurred in downtown Osaka following the various public mass transit services immediately follow- 2018 disaster. Based on the questionnaire survey on ing the earthquake, which occurred on a weekday morn- those who had difficulty commuting, which is consid- ing. For instance, according to Yomiuri Shimbun newspa- ered to be a factor of traffic congestion, it was found per and the Jiji Press news service, the traffic congestion that 60–70% commuted as usual after the earthquake; that occurred due to the suspension of rail services and about half of the commuters who usually take the train other public transportation lasted approximately 14 hours. changed their method of commuting, one-quarter of At its peak it was 7 times the scale of normal conges- whom used automobiles; there were very few who ex- tion, preventing Governor Matsui from reaching the Dis- perienced problems in their work because they had not aster Response Headquarters and lengthening the arrival gone to work or their workplace had closed down for time of ambulance cars to 42 minutes, 6 times the normal the day; and many felt that it would be better to re- rate [2, 3]. ceive instructions on work attendance in the aftermath Such phenomena, in which many people encounter dif- of an earthquake. The present study points out the ficulty in commuting because of the suspension of trans- need for companies and society to adopt rules so that portation services following a disaster, have occurred sev- those who find it difficult to commute will refrain from eral times in recent years, and individual phenomena have going to work and remain in their local communities been subjected to social surveys to study their profiles. to help others, except for those in certain occupations For instance, following the March 11, 2011, Great East or positions. Japan Earthquake, which occurred on a weekday afternoon, approximately five million people are said to have had difficulty returning home in the Tokyo metropolitan Keywords: difficulty of attending work for commuters, area, producing overcrowded spaces on some sidewalks, the 2018 Osaka earthquake, questionnaire survey such as in the vicinity of bridges, and traffic congestion on roadways that lasted until early in the morning of the following day. In this case, Hiroi et al. [4], for instance, 1. Introduction conducted a survey immediately after the earthquake on approximately 2,000 people who had commuted that day In the 2018 Osaka earthquake, which occurred at to the Tokyo metropolitan area, asking them in detail around 7:58 a.m. Japan Standard Time, June 18, 2018, whether and how they had returned home, what their rea- peak seismic intensity slightly below 6 (JMA Seismic In- sons were, and what routes they took, to examine its out- tensity Scale) was recorded in Kita ward, Takatsuki city, line [4]. Furthermore, from April 3 to 5, 2012, Japan was Hirakata city, Ibaraki city, and Minoh city in Osaka pre- visited by a giant low-pressure system that was close in fecture. According to the latest damage report released scale to a typhoon (explosive low-pressure system), as a by the Fire and Disaster Management Agency, there were result of which public transportation was suspended due 6 deaths (including 1 earthquake-related death) in Osaka to wind and flood damage, thus preventing many people prefecture and 462 injured in 7 prefectures, where hous- from returning home. Hiroi et al. [5] conducted a social ing damage amounted to 21 completely collapsed houses, survey with a sample group of 2,158 people on the diffi- 483 partially collapsed houses, and 61,266 partially dam- culty of returning home due to the arrival of the explosive aged houses [1]. This earthquake can be characterized low-pressure system, discussing the behavior of return- by its occurrence during commuting hours in a major ur- ing home and the situation of disaster information collec- ban area. For this reason, not only did it point out the tion, or the different environments of those who encoun-

212 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020

© Fuji Technology Press Ltd. Creative Commons CC BY-ND: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/). Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

tered difficulty returning home following earthquakes or a method that relies on traffic control will not function im- wind and flood damage [5]. Meanwhile, the 2018 Osaka mediately after an earthquake” [11]. Yet, the term “those earthquake occurred early on a weekday morning, as men- that encounter difficulty in commuting (shukkin kon’nan- tioned earlier. Therefore, overcrowding only occurred on sha)” is not used in these papers, nor has it been given some bridges in the evening, after some time had passed, a clear definition so far. According to the Central Disas- while a greater problem was posed by the traffic con- ter Prevention Council, “a person having difficulty return- gestion on the roadways during commuting hours. This ing home (kitaku kon’nan-sha)” is often defined as “a per- pointed out many issues related to commuting immedi- son who has given up trying to go home or who attempts ately after an earthquake, and subsequently, Osaka prefec- to walk over a considerable distance to return home, be- ture expanded its guidelines for disaster response, which cause public transportation has been suspended due to an had previously only considered a scenario in which a dis- earthquake or some other cause.” Since roadway conges- aster occurred during working hours. It now considers tion during commuting hours can also pose problems, as three patterns of disaster occurrence – during commuting pointed out by the above sources, in this paper, we shall hours, during working hours, and when returning home define, following the above definition, “a person who en- – and has set rules according to those different times [6]. counters difficulty commuting” to be someone who “re- For this reason, the present authors conducted a social sur- frains from commuting to work or attempts to commute vey of the effect that the suspension of transportation had over a considerable distance by means other than the one on morning commuters following the 2018 Osaka earth- normally used because public transportation has been sus- quake, instead of focusing on the difficulty of returning pended due to an earthquake or some other cause.” home in the evening. Thus, the objective of this paper is to report the detailed findings of this investigation. The phenomenon of people encountering difficulty 2. Status of Transportation Services on the Day commuting after a large-scale disaster and the need for of the Earthquake and an Outline of the countermeasures were discussed prior to the 2018 Osaka Survey earthquake, such as by the Review Committee on Com- panies and Disaster Response held by the Cabinet Office Before presenting an outline of the survey, we will re- in 2002, where it was pointed out that “while measures view the status of public transport on the day of the earth- for those having difficulty returning home are important, quake. Centered in Osaka city, much of the transporta- measures for those who encounter difficulty commuting tion services in the Kinki region were suspended immedi- are also necessary” [7]. Furthermore, although not a re- 1 ately after the earthquake. According to the daily news- cent event, there were reports of a phenomenon in which paper Asahi Shimbun [12], operation was suspended on fire engines and ambulances were unable to reach their all non-Shinkansen (zairai) lines operated by JR Nishini- destinations because of the large-scale traffic congestion hon (West Japan) and JR Tokai in Osaka, Kyoto, Nara, that occurred immediately following the Great Hanshin- Hyogo, and Shiga prefectures. Operation was resumed Awaji Earthquake [8–10]. According to Nakagawa and on most lines by the time of the first train the next morn- Kobayashi [11], large-scale traffic congestion took place ing, except for certain areas where the effects of the earth- from 7 a.m. on the 17th at the traffic inflow section on the quake remained. Furthermore, the private (i.e., non-JR) east side of the area that received the most severe damage operators Hankyu, Nankai, Hanshin, Keihan, and Osaka (National Route Nos. 2 and 43 near the border of Higashi Metro also suspended operation on all lines (Kintetsu sus- Nada ward and Ashiya city), where they point out that pended operation on some of its lines) but resumed oper- “the congestion was probably caused by commuting ve- ation sometime between the afternoon and night of the hicles, since this time zone was too early for most emer- same day. Thus, as stated earlier, the 2018 Osaka earth- gency vehicles to have arrived,” “the early stage of traf- quake was considerably smaller in scale than the Great fic congestion was mainly due to local vehicles carrying Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in terms of the seismic inten- commuters, which was followed by an influx of an in- sity level, and it did not produce the level of severe dam- creasing number of emergency vehicles from outlying ar- age to the urban landscape or large-scale urban fires, so eas, which aggravated the congestion,” and that “a lesson public transportation was able to resume operation in one- can be pointed out that, while it may be important for each half to one day. Therefore, it must be recognized, as a individual to arrive at the workplace as soon as possible, basic premise, that the phenomenon occurred under cir- this can cause severe traffic congestion during the stage cumstances that were quite different from mega disasters of emergency transport which will be mobilized immedi- such as the Nankai Trough mega-earthquake or Tokyo in- ately afterwards.” Noting that “it was not until the 18th land earthquake. that the police comprehended the overall disaster-struck Starting from that basic premise, the authors con- area and enforced an area-wide control,” they conclude ducted a social survey on the difficulty of commuting on that “traffic congestion had begun before the system of 1,920 people from among commuters residing in Osaka, traffic control was put into place, and it is quite likely that Hyogo, Kyoto, and Nara prefectures who had not yet left their homes to commute or who were en route to 1. It is reported in [8–10] that the severe traffic congestion was aggravated by people on foot or riding motorcycles/bicycles who were forced to use work when the 2018 Osaka earthquake occurred. An out- the roadways.

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 213 Hiroi, U et al.

30.0% Table 1. Outline of the questionnaire survey. 27.1%

25.0% Kyoto prefecture, Osaka prefecture, Surveyed area Hyogo prefecture, Nara prefecture 20.0% Employed residents of the surveyed area, aged 20 or older, who were at home Survey target 15.0% before going to work or en route to work 13.1% when the earthquake occurred 11.3% 11.3% Survey organiza- 10.0% 9.1% Survey Research Center Co., Ltd. tion 5.5% 4.4% 5.0% 3.8% 4.0% Web survey (closed survey against mon- 3.0% Survey method 1.5% 1.6%2.0% 1.5% itors) 0.5% 0.4% IT engineer IT Engineer Architecture, construction, civil engineering Creative Materials, chemical, food processing, medical processing, food chemical, Materials, Office work, management work, Office Web, internet,game Planning, marketing, businessowner, service food retail, Service, Skilled craftsman,equipment and facilities, Medical, welfare,nursing Other Sales 0.0% Education,day nursery, government worker fisheries and forestry Agriculture, Hiroi Lab, Sekiya Lab, University of Professional Survey entity Tokyo, Survey Research Center Co.,

Ltd. transportation, transport administration Sample size 1,920 products technology

line of the survey is presented in Table 1. The subjects were sampled from those who resided in prefectures where many railway lines suspended operation on June 18, 2016, the day of the earthquake; were 20 or older in age; and stated that they were “at home before going to work,” “driving to work,” “riding a train to work,” “en = route to work by means of transportation other than a car Fig. 1. Occupations of the survey targets (SA, N 1,920). or railway (subway),” “en route to work on foot,” or “en route to work but inside a building or structure (other than 50.0% 48.0% home).” Therefore, the subjects did not include house- 45.0% wives, students, or those who were on leave from work; 40.0% those who had already arrived at work; or those who were 35.0% traveling for private reasons when the earthquake struck. 30.0% The survey was conducted online with a sample group 25.0% 20.3% of 1,920 people who met the criteria listed above, selected 20.0% 17.0% from among 222,718 net research monitors. 15.0% 10.0% 7.9% The subjects were subjected to stratified sampling 4.1% 5.0% 1.4% based on their locations of residence and age: 1,200 were 0.9% 0.3% 0.2% 45 min.to 1 hr Less than min 30 than Less 30 min. to 45 min 45 to min. 30 hr.2 30 min. or more 1 hr. to 1 hr. 15 min hr.1 min.45 to 2 hr 0.0% 1 hr. 15 min. to 1 hr. 30 min 1 hr. 30 min. to 1 hr. 45 min residents of Osaka prefecture and 240 were sampled from 2 hr. to 2 hr. 30 min each of the other 3 prefectures. The age groups of twen- ties, thirties, forties, fifties, and sixties-and-beyond were represented equally. The subjects were asked about their commuting status on the day of the earthquake, company instructions related to work attendance and their personal assessments, the effect on work, and future measures. In the remainder of this paper, we collate the data obtained by the survey to develop an understanding of the actual situation on the day of the earthquake, and then Fig. 2. Average commuting time of the survey targets (SA, = discuss some issues and suggestions on measures to deal N 1,920). with those who encounter difficulty commuting in the future. The individual attributes of the survey subjects and their commuting status when the earthquake occurred are ment workers. Since the average commuting time during shown in Figs. 1–3. In terms of occupation, the sampled normal times was less than 30 minutes for half of the sur- group included only a few workers in agriculture, forestry, vey subjects, slightly less than 70% of them were still at and fisheries; creative occupations such as the media, ap- home, not having left for work, at 7:58 a.m., when the parel, or design; or professionals such as consultants, fi- earthquake struck. The survey target group of 1,920 was 2 nancial workers, and real estate agents, while there were made up of 966 men and 954 women, while 311 (16.2%) many office workers; management-level employees; those worked on a flex-time schedule (i.e., their work start time in the service industry, retail business, food services, and sales; people in the medical, welfare, and nursing fields; 2. We had planned to sample a group with an even sex distribution but were unable to enlist enough women living in Nara prefecture, which resulted plus teachers, insurance company employees, and govern- in the different number of men and women.

214 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

70.0% 66.2% 40.0% 35.8% 60.0% 35.0%

50.0% 30.0% 28.6% 40.0% 25.0% 30.0% 20.0% 18.5% 20.0% 17.2% 14.1% 15.7% 8.1% 15.0% 10.0% 5.6% 3.3% 2.7% 9.0% 0.0% 10.0% At home before Driving to work Riding a train to En route to work En route to work En route to work going to work work by means of on foot but inside a transportation building or 5.0% other than a car structure (other or railway than home)

0.0% Thought that Thought that a Thought that it was Didn't expect an Did not think that it Had no thoughts Nankai Trough major catastrophe a foreshock earthquake in the was serious such as those Fig. 3. Status at the time of the earthquake occurrence (SA, earthquake had was occurring, on preceding a large Kansai region mentioned here come the scale of the earthquake = Great Hanshin- N 1,920). Awaji Earthquake

Fig. 4. What the respondents felt when the earthquake oc- = Table 2. Relation between locations of residence and work curred (SA, N 1,920). of survey targets (N = 1,920).

Kyoto Osaka Hyogo Nara pref. pref. pref. pref. quake occurred. It shows that, overall, about 60 to 70% (work) (work) (work) (work) decided to go to work after the 2018 Osaka earthquake. Kyoto pref. In terms of where they were, 57.6% of those who were 215 19 2 4 (res.) still at home when the earthquake occurred went to work Osaka pref. as usual, while 26.9% decided to stay home. Meanwhile, 28 1134 33 5 (res.) 71.3% of those who were already on their way to work Hyogo pref. when the earthquake occurred decided to continue on 1 53 186 0 (res.) their way, while 28.7% returned to their homes (includ- Nara pref. ing some who went to work later). 7 79 2 152 (res.) We asked 1,423 respondents who opted to go to work whether they were able to arrive at work. The results, given in Fig. 6, show that roughly 60% of those who went was undetermined). to work on the day of the earthquake were “able to com- Table 2 presents the cross-tabulated results on the lo- mute as usual.” Meanwhile, roughly 40% encountered cations of residence and work, according to prefecture, of some difficulty in commuting, including those who were the survey targets. It shows that many lived and worked “unable to go to work that day,” were “detained at some in the same prefecture, while only 12.1% worked outside point on the way to work so that it took longer than usual their prefecture of residence. This is a major difference to commute,” and were “not detained anywhere on the from the Tokyo metropolitan area. way to work, but it still took longer than usual to commute,” even though the earthquake recorded a peak seismic intensity slightly lower than six (“6-lower”). When 3. Personal Perceptions Immediately After the asked whether they had been confined to the train car Earthquake and While Commuting in which they were riding at the time of the earthquake, 10.5% answered that they had been. First, we will summarize the perceptions regarding the Figure 7 shows the “reasons for going to work” for 2018 Osaka earthquake and the status of commuting. the 1,423 who decided to go to work, and Fig. 8 shows Fig. 4 shows the perceptions of the respondents at the time the “reasons for not going to work” for the 497 who the earthquake occurred. The results show that, while the decided to not go. Among the reasons to go to work, earthquake did not cause severe damage except in certain the most common was “because I live or was at a loca- areas, relatively few respondents (15.7%), stated that they tion close to my workplace,” at 39.2%, followed by “be- “did not think that it was serious” immediately following cause I thought that I would be able to work as usual the earthquake, perhaps because it was difficult to clearly if I went to work,” at 29.5%; “because there was no conclude that “there had been no severe damage” when instruction to refrain from coming to work by my em- deciding whether to go to work or not. The most frequent ployer (company),” at 24.2%; and “because I was worried response, at 35.8%, was that they “thought that it was a about the situation at my workplace,” at 19.1%. Those foreshock preceding a large earthquake.” who responded that they had to work in disaster response The decision of whether to go to work or not is shown made up 7.0%, which is relatively high. The occupa- in Fig. 5, according to where they were when the earth- tional category most represented in this group was “ed-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 215 Hiroi, U et al.

100.0% 58.6% Did not go to work 60.0%

90.0% Went to work later 50.0% 80.0% Went to work as usual 40.0% 70.0% 57.6 60.0% % 30.0%

50.0% 20.9% 20.0% Subsequent action (%) 14.1% 40.0% 26.9 10.0% 30.0% % 6.3% 15.5 20.0% % 0.0% Was unable to Was detained at Was not Was able to go to work that some point on detained commute as 10.0% day the way to work anywhere on the usual so that it took way to work, but 0.0% longer than it still took usual to longer than Was at home (N=1271) commute usual to commute 100.0% Returned 90.0% home and Fig. 6. Commuting status on the day of the earthquake (SA, did not go to N = 1,423). 80.0% work Returned 71.3% home but 70.0% went to work later 60.0% Continued ple (12.1%). In sum, the decision to commute or not was on to work 50.0% found to depend on 1) expectations on whether it was possible to commute or not, 2) instructions from the em-

40.0% Subsequent action (%) ployer, 3) expectations on whether it would be possible 30.0% 23.9% to work, and 4) the need for disaster response. It should 20.0% be noted that the decisions to commute or not to commute 4.8% and their reasons varied depending on occupation and dis- 10.0% aster scale. 0.0% Next, we examined the respondents’ methods of com- Was en route to work muting. Table 3 presents the decision to go to work or not (N=649) according to the usual method of commuting. It shows that the decision to go to work or not was affected by Fig. 5. Decision whether to go to work or not (SA, N = 1,920). the usual method of commuting: 64.2% of those who usually take the train to work decided to go to work following the 2018 Osaka earthquake, while 83.0% of those who do not usually take the train to work decided to go ucation, day nursery, government worker,” at 39.7%, fol- to work. As stated earlier, of the 1,423 people who de- lowed by “architecture, construction, civil engineering,” cided to go to work, 40.8% usually ride the train to work, at 25.8% and “planning, marketing, business owner, ad- and 59.2% usually do not. Of the respondents who usu- ministration,” at 27.3%. There were very few “IT engi- ally take the train to work, the proportion of those who neers” (0%), “engineers” (4.5%), “professionals” (5.8%), used a different method to commute after the earthquake and people in “creative” fields (5.9%). Among the rea- is shown in Fig. 9, and the methods chosen are shown sons for not going to work, shown in Fig. 8, “because in Fig. 10. While those people who went to work later it seemed that train operations would not resume any- than usual were also included, it was found that about time soon,” at 59.0%, and “because I was instructed by a quarter of the people switched to cars (including com- my employer (company) to not come to work,” at 51.1%, pany hired vehicles) and taxes. It is likely that the severe were conspicuously high, while 10 to 20% of those who traffic congestion in Osaka city after the earthquake, as did not go to work did so because they “were still at mentioned earlier, was caused by the above switching of home,” “had no urgent work or business that needed to transportation methods in addition to the closure of the be attended to,” “thought that a large aftershock may highways. In other words, if a large-scale disaster that still come,” or “thought that I wouldn’t be able to re- exceeded the scale of the 2018 Osaka earthquake were to turn home at the usual time if I went to work.” Among occur in a large metropolitan area in the future, the switch- those who responded “because I didn’t have to engage in ing of the method of commuting to automobiles due to the disaster response,” there were a high number of “engi- suspended operation of public transportation is likely to neers” (21%), “professionals” (13.0%), and “sales” peo- have a large impact on firefighting and rescue activities,

216 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

Other 3.1% There was no problem in particular with my family 19.7% I was able to get in touch with my family, and there was nothing to worry about 17.1% I thought that I would be able to work as usual if I went to work 29.5% I thought that the confusion would have subsided between commuting and returning home 8.6% I thought that there would not be any intense aftershocks 7.4% Those around me were going to work 5.6% I was worried about the situation at my workplace 19.1% People around me told me that I should go to work 0.4% I judged that I should or would be able to go to work based on media reports 9.7% I was encouraged by my family (or housemate) to go to work 0.5% I was instructed by my employer (company) to come to work 11.6% There was no instruction from my employer (company) to refrain from coming to work 24.2% I live or was at a location close to my workplace 39.2% I had already left home 13.5% it seemed that train operations would resume by the time I would go home 3.2% I had urgent work or business that needed to be attended to 10.1% I had to engage in disaster response 17.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

Fig. 7. Reasons for deciding to go to work (MA, N = 1,423).

Other 4.8% I tried to go to work but was unable to get there 4.0% I had to get my child or family member who requires nursing care 5.0% I was worried about my family 15.5% I thought that, even if I went to work, I would not be able to work as usual 12.9% I thought that I would not be able to return home at the usual time if I went to work 15.9% I thought that a large aftershock may still come 16.9% Those around me were not going to work 1.4% I was concerned about the damage to my house or neighborhood 6.6% People around me told me that I shouldn't go to work 2.2% I judged that it would be better to not go to work based on media reports 11.9% My family (or housemate) told me that I should not go to work 4.8% I was instructed by my employer (company) to not come to work 51.1% There was no instruction from my employer (company) to come to work 7.6% I live or was at a location far from my workplace 12.7% I was still at home 24.7% It seemed that train operations would not resume anytime soon 59.0% I had no urgent work or business that needed to be attended to 18.9% I did not have to engage in disaster response 7.6% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

Fig. 8. Reasons for deciding not to go to work (MA, N = 497).

mediately following the earthquake in Fig. 11. It can be Table 3. Decision to commute or not to commute according seen that although phone calls via cell phones and smart- to the usual commuting method (N = 1,920). phones, email via cell phones and smartphones, and land- Decided to go Decided not to line phones were somewhat affected, the environment of to work go to work information gathering following the 2018 Osaka earth- Do not usually take the quake was generally unaffected. Fig. 12 shows the survey 842 173 train results on the kinds of rumor with which the respondents Usually take the train 581 324 came into contact following the earthquake. These rumors were heard by some of the respondents. Figure 13 shows whether the respondents were instructed by their employer or company to come to work which suggests the need for some measures to deal with on the day of the earthquake. We saw earlier that a fair the issue of people encountering difﬁculty in commuting. number of those who went to work on that day did so “because there was no instruction to refrain from com- ingtoworkbymyemployer(company).”Thisiscon- 4. Instructions from Companies sistent with the results on company instructions, which showed that 32.8% of the respondents had received in- We examined the survey results on instructions issued structions from their employers, while 61.2% had re- by companies, which are likely to greatly affect the de- ceived no such instructions, indicating that many com- cision to go to work. First, we show, as the underlying panies did not issue speciﬁc instructions on whether to condition, the environment of information collection im-

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 217 Hiroi, U et al.

100.0% Changed 90.0% Did not change 80.0%

70.0%

60.0% 54.9%

50.0% 45.1%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

Fig. 9. Whether the commuters changed their method Fig. 10. Switched method of commuting (SA, N = 262). of commuting (SA, N = 581).

Fig. 11. Availability of communication methods used after the earthquake (SA, N = 1,920).

come to work or not. The speciﬁc contents of these in- they followed them. Figs. 15–17 show the results on structions were “to come to work” (27.3%) or “to re- whether the respondents felt that the company instruc- frain from coming to work” (72.7%). Fig. 14 shows tions they received regarding work attendance were ap- the routes by which the companies conveyed these in- propriate, where those who felt that “it was appropriate” structions. It shows that 42.1% received the instructions greatly exceeded those who felt that “it was inappropri- by “phone call via cell phone or smartphone,” 24.6% by ate,” as to the contents of the instructions, the time they ”email via cell phone or smartphone,” and 23.3% by “text, were issued, and the means by which they were commu- stamp, or photo communication via LINE.” It can be seen nicated. In particular, when the instruction was to refrain that, in the majority of cases, the company instructions re- from coming to work (Fig. 17), close to 90% felt that the garding work attendance were received via cell phone and content “was appropriate,” suggesting that it was received smartphone. in a favorable light. Meanwhile, a somewhat higher pro- Next, we examined the respondents’ assessments of portion of respondents who received instructions to come these instructions regarding work attendance and whether to work felt that it was “inappropriate,” compared to those

218 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

70.0% 65.9% 50.0%

60.0% 45.0% 42.1% 40.0% 50.0% 35.0% 40.0% 30.0% 24.6% 25.0% 23.3% 30.0% 20.0% 18.7% 18.3% 20.0% 15.0% 12.7% 7.6% 10.0% 5.3% 5.5% 5.9% 5.1% 10.0% 6.2% 6.8% 4.1% 5.0% 2.9% 0.0% 1.4% 0.6%0.6% Zebra Cracks Hankyu Keihan Water Foreigners Did not Landline telephone Failedreceive to instruction Phonecall via cell phone orsmartphone In person Other Email viaPC Email(including carrier mail,gmail, short and mail)via Safety confirmation system used byemployed company coworker from instruction the about Heard Text, stamp, or photo communication via LINE via communication photo or stamp, Text, No-charge call via LINE escaped appeared in train train supply cut committing hear any of 0.0% SNS other or Instagram Facebook, Twitter, from zoo the roof of derailed derailed off in entire theft and these Kyocera Minoo city other rumors Dome crimes

Fig. 12. Rumors encountered by respondents after the earth- smartphone or phone cell quake (SA, N = 1,920).

100.0% Received instruction 90.0% No instruction was issued 80.0% Do not know 70.0% 61.2% 60.0% 50.0% Fig. 14. Means of receiving instructions from the employer 40.0% 32.8% or company (MA, N = 630). 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 6.0% structions. Breaking this down further, among those who 0.0% received instructions to attend work, 94.7% complied, Company instruction issued or unissued while 1.2% refused, whereas among those who received (N=1920) instructions to refrain from attending work, 88.1% complied and 4.2% did not. This suggests that instructions Fig. 13. Whether company instructions were issued (SA, N = 1,920). to leave work early in times of wind and flood damage and those on work attendance at times of earthquakes have different compliance levels, and in the latter case, more people complied with instructions to attend work who received instructions to refrain from coming to work. than they refrained from coming to work. When we tabu- Fig. 18 shows whether those who received company in- lated the status of work attendance among those who were structions complied with them. It shows that close to 90% at home according to whether instructions were issued, of those who received instructions, whether to come to we found that, among those who had received instruc- work or not, responded that they “complied with the in- tions, 43.8% refrained from going to work, 19.7% went to structions received from my employer regarding work at- work later, and 36.4% went to work as usual. Meanwhile, tendance on the day of the earthquake.” According to a among those who did not receive instructions, 18.5% re- survey by Hiroi et al. [5], about 20% of those who refrained from going to work, 13.8% went to work later, ceived company instructions to go home early because an and 67.7% went to work as usual. Based on these find- explosive low-pressure system was approaching did not ings, we can discern different patterns of work attendance comply, and 79% of them went home after they had fin- depending on whether instructions were issued, which ished their business (work). In the present case, 6.7% re- suggests that it may be possible to reduce the commuter sponded that they were “unable to comply” with instruc- volume to some extent by having companies issue instructions regarding work attendance at the time of the earth- 3 tions to their employees to refrain from coming to work. quake, while only 3.4% stated that they “defied” the in- Since the communications environment was favorable following the 2018 Osaka earthquake, as was shown in 3. Of those respondents who stated that they were “unable to comply,” 43.2% gave as the reason for going to work the fact that “they had Fig. 11, there was no problem receiving instructions on already left home.” work attendance via phone call or email via cell phones

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 219 Hiroi, U et al.

Fig. 15. Whether the company’s instructions were ap- Fig. 17. Whether the company’s instructions were appro- propriate (all respondents who received instructions, SA, N priate (all respondents who received instructions to refrain = 626). from attending work, SA, N = 455).

100.0% 89.9% 90.0%

80.0% Complied with instruction 70.0% Defied instruction 60.0% Was unable to 50.0% comply 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 6.7% 10.0% 3.4% 0.0%

Fig. 18. Whether respondents complied with the company’s instructions on work attendance (SA, N = 626). Fig. 16. Whether the company’s instructions were appropriate (all respondents who received instructions to attend work, SA, N = 171). whether they would be contacted when an earthquake occurred,” while 15.0% stated that their employers or companies had set up rules in advance regarding work atten- or smartphones. However, the communications network dance after earthquakes. Meanwhile, 19.1% stated that can be adversely affected in the event of large disas- “they would be contacted when an earthquake occurred” ters, so it may be necessary to establish some rules and 16.3% said that they did not know. Fig. 20 shows regarding work attendance following sudden disasters whether or not the respondents felt that such rules are such as earthquakes. When we asked the respondents necessary. It shows that approximately 80% felt that “it whether the companies that employed them had estab- is better to establish in advance some rules” regarding lished such rules on work attendance following earth- work attendance when an earthquake occurs, pointing to quakes, we found that half of them had no such rules or the perceived need for such rules on work attendance fol- established contact methods. This is shown in Fig. 19, lowing earthquakes. Fig. 21 shows the responses to the where 49.6% stated that “it had not been determined in ad- question “what will you do when a large earthquake oc- vance whether employees are to come to work or not, nor curs in the future while you are commuting?” In total,

220 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

40.0%

35.0%

30.0% 27.2% 23.9% 25.0% 21.7% 20.0%

15.0% 13.2% 14.1%

10.0%

5.0%

0.0% Return home Continue Temporarily Choose to I don't know commuting stop at some return home location or continue to go to work depending on which is closer

Fig. 21. Response if a large earthquake occurs during com- Fig. 19. Whether the company has established rules regard- muting in the future (SA, N = 1,920). ing work attendance after an earthquake (SA, N = 1,920).

100.0% ities, premised on large-scale damage that occurs during I believe that it is work hours. In this regard, the above ﬁndings suggest a 90.0% better to establish some rules in need to examine whether it is necessary to secure loca- 78.5% advance tions where commuters can temporarily stay when a dis- 80.0% I do not think that it is necessary to aster occurs, and if so, how this can be accomplished. 70.0% establish any rules in advance 60.0% I do not know 5. Status of Business Operations 50.0% Finally, we examined the operating status of the re- 40.0% spondents’ workplaces after the 2018 Osaka earthquake. Fig. 22 30.0% shows the responses when those who did not go to work were asked about the effects of their absence or of 20.0% the workplace closing down that day. It shows “work or 13.5% 8.0% business was held up” for only 6.4% of those respondents. 10.0% It is possible, however, that those who did not go to work 0.0% did so only because they knew that it would not adversely affect the workplace, so we also presented that response Fig. 20. Expectations of work attendance rules in case of when we asked about the status of business operations at earthquake occurrence (SA, N = 1,920). their workplaces on the day of the earthquake. Since this is likely to be greatly affected by the intensity of the earthquake, we asked about the status of business operations of those working in Kita ward, Takatsuki city, Hirakata city, 13.2% responded that they would continue to go to work, and Ibaraki city, all in Osaka prefecture, which experi- while 23.9% stated that they would choose to return home enced seismic intensities of slightly below six according or continue on to work depending on which was closer. to the latest damage reports [1]. The results are shown in Although 73.4% of the respondents who were en route Fig. 23. Only 29.3% stated that “business operations were to work when the 2018 Osaka earthquake hit continued conducted as usual,” while operations were delayed or on to work, as we saw earlier, many respondents stated cancelled for the majority. In particular, those who said “it that “it would be better to not go to work the next time.” was not possible to operate,” “business was closed due to Meanwhile, about 20% stated that they would “temporar- the earthquake,” and “although there was some confusion ily stop at some location.” In dealing with those having in the morning hours, operations were subsequently con- difﬁculty returning home, such schemes have previously ducted as usual in the afternoon” together made up 34.1%, been promoted as preventing people at work from return- so even for an earthquake with seismic intensity slightly ing home all at once or securing temporary stopover facil- below six, there were more companies that were unable

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 221 Hiroi, U et al.

70.0% 60.8% 60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0% 22.6% 20.0%

10.0% 6.4% 5.4% 0.7% 1.7% 2.4% 0.0% Was Since some Work or There were no I was worried Others There were no reprimanded by people had business was adverse whether it was effects in superior or gone to work, I held up consequences okay to not go particular coworker felt for work or to work based uncomfortable business on my own the next day operations judgment

Fig. 22. Effects of being absent from work or of the workplace being closed (SA, N = 296).

40.0%

35.0% 29.3% 30.0%

25.0%

20.0% 14.9% 15.0% 12.9% 12.4% 12.4% 11.2% 10.0% 6.8% 5.0%

0.0% Business Although there Although there Although It was not Business was Since I did not operations were was some was some business was possible to closed due to go to work conducted as confusion early confusion in the conducted operate the earthquake based on my usual on, operations morning hours, during the own judgment, I were operations were morning hours, do not know if subsequently subsequently it was closed business was conducted as conducted as down after noon conducted usual usual in the afternoon

Fig. 23. Operational status of the workplace on the day of the earthquake (SA, N = 249).

to operate or decided to close for the day than those that 6. Conclusion conducted business as usual. Taken together with the responses given in Figs. 15–17, this finding suggests that This study reported on a survey on commuter behavior, there were few cases in which delaying or closing down focusing in particular on whether the respondents went to work after the large-scale earthquake created problems. work or not following the June 18, 2018, earthquake that The effect of being absent from work due to an earthquake occurred in an area centered in Osaka prefecture. Follow- on business operations is likely to vary greatly based on ing are the findings: the respondent’s occupation. This is shown in Fig. 24.4 (1) About 70% of the respondents were still at home get- Accordingly, being absent from work had a relatively ting ready for work when the 2018 Osaka earthquake large effect on business operations for the fields of “plan- occurred. About 60% of them chose to go to work as ning, marketing, business owner, and administration” and usual, while about 70% of those who were on their “skilled craftsman, equipment and facilities, transporta- way to work continued on to work as usual. tion, and transport.” (2) Severe traffic congestion occurred on roadways following the earthquake. About half of those who usu- 4. Among those engaged in agriculture, forestry, or fisheries, everyone went ally take the train to commute changed their method to work. of commuting, and one-quarter of them used automo-

222 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

20.0% commuting after an earthquake can be broadly divided 18.0% into three items: 1) the effect on the company’s disaster 16.0% 14.3% 14.3% response or business continuation, 2) the possibility that 14.0% increased automobile commuters may cause traffic con- 12.0% gestion and thus impede disaster response such as the de- 10.0% 10.0% 8.3% ployment of fire engines or ambulances, and 3) the issue 7.7% 7.7% 8.0% 6.9% of those who face difficulty returning home in the evening 6.0% and later hours of that day. The present survey focused on 4.0% 4.0% item 2), which is reported to actually have taken place 0.0% 0.0% 2.0% following the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake. As stated 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% earlier, the urban landscape was not severely damaged by

0.0% marketing, Planning, owner,business Materials, chemical, food processing, Education, day nursery, government nursery, day government Education, Architecture, construction, civil Web, internet, game internet, Web, facilities, transportation, transport transport transportation, facilities, nursing welfare, Medical, Service, retail, food service food retail, Service, Creative Engineer Other Sales Professional engineer IT Office work, work, Office management Skilled craftsman, equipment and and equipment craftsman, Skilled the 2018 Osaka earthquake, with a peak seismic intensity medical products technology products medical slightly below six (“6-lower”), so railroad operations were engineering

administration resumed relatively quickly. Therefore, the commuting be-

worker havior was not necessarily the same as that in earthquakes with intensities above six (“6-upper”) or seven. With this in mind, we can conclude the following based on our findings. Although it is likely that a certain number of people feel that their absence from work following a large earthquake would not cause problems, it is possible that some workers would choose to commute even when they feel Fig. 24. The proportion of those for whom being absent that not doing so will not lead to problems, particularly from work or their workplace being closed affected work or when there are no rules regarding work attendance follow- business operations, according to occupation (SA, N = 286). ing an earthquake or the company does not issue any instructions. Furthermore, it cannot be denied that problems affecting human lives can arise, as referred to in 2) above, when those commuters switch their transportation mode biles, including taxis, to commute. to automobiles. In fact, following the 2018 earthquake, (3) Although the situation differed across occupations, Osaka city has been considering the institutionalization only 6.4% of those who did not go to work stated that of the “disaster mode,” in particular, asking companies to their absence from work or the fact that the workplace curb their employees’ work attendance and their leaving had closed down on that day caused problems in their the workplace to return home in times of disaster [13]. work or operations, indicating that there are very few Needless to say, the large-scale disasters that are expected cases in which delaying work or closing down busi- to strike metropolitan areas in the future will greatly differ nesses after a large-scale earthquake causes problems. from the 2018 Osaka earthquake in terms of the level of (4) The commuters made decisions on whether to com- physical damage as well as people’s perceptions, behav- mute or not following the earthquake based on the iors, and purposes for commuting. Therefore, a measure instructions issued by their companies or employers, to “stop nonessential and nonurgent commuting” will not expectations of whether it was possible to commute solve all of the problems related to traffic congestion after or not, expectations on whether work could be under- a disaster. For instance, based on the lessons learned from taken or not, and the need for disaster response. the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, some studies [14] (5) With regard to the first item in (4), many companies emphasize the need to “curb nonessential and nonurgent did not issue instructions regarding work attendance vehicles,” as was pointed out after the 2018 Osaka earth- even though the information communication environ- quake and suggested by the present survey. Meanwhile, ment was good. Meanwhile, those respondents who other studies have proposed identifying “what kind of received instructions felt that they were usually ap- commuting is important” from the viewpoint of entire propriate. cities or societies. Some have called for the construction (6) Half of the companies had not established rules re- of a system of initial mobilization that is not premised on garding work attendance or the means of contacting automobiles, with the goal of reducing the total volume employees following an earthquake, while about 80% of commuter traffic rather than just curbing nonessential of the respondents felt that it would be better if their and nonurgent vehicles. This is in recognition of the phe- companies or employers adopted rules on work atten- nomenon whereby traffic congestion due to commuting is dance following an earthquake. actually made worse as increasing numbers of companies As noted earlier, various issues with commuting during adopt initial mobilization systems, as indicated by such times of disaster, such as after the 2018 Osaka earthquake passages as “[people] in disaster struck areas are aware or planned mass transit service suspension in response to that severe damage has occurred, and unlike regular com- wind and flood damage, are becoming apparent. While muting, the commuting that took place was for relief and previous research on those who encountered difficulty in restoration purposes while others acted to check the sta- commuting is scant, the issues of those facing difficulty tus of the workplace at the earliest date,” or “there were

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 223 Hiroi, U et al. very few vehicles that encountered traffic congestion that can be called nonessential and nonurgent, and many peo- Name: ple felt that their actions were important and essential.” UHiroi In other words, these studies examine the issues in greater Affiliation: depth by taking into account the tradeoff between items 1) Associate Professor, Department of Urban Engi- and 2) [11]. While noting that the findings obtained from neering, School of Engineering, The University the present survey represent just one approach to resolv- of Tokyo ing such traffic congestion based on reports that traffic control had a limited effect after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, this study points out the need for companies Address: and societies to adopt rules so that those who find it dif- 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan ficult to commute will refrain from going to work and re- Brief Career: main in their local communities to help others, except for 2007-2012 Assistant Professor, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo those in certain occupations or positions. In addition, not- 2012-2016 Associate Professor, Disaster Mitigation Research Center, ing that major traffic congestion resulted because about Nagoya University one-eighth of train commuters switched to automobiles 2016- Associate Professor, Department of Urban Engineering, School of as their transportation method after the 2018 Osaka earth- Engineering, The University of Tokyo Selected Publications: quake, we feel that the survey suggests, at the very least, • U. Hiroi, A. Murayama, Y. Chiba, H. Komatsu, M. Mori, K. Yamada, the need for business continuity plans centered on alter- and N. Fukuwa, “A Proposal of Multi-Scale type urban disaster mitigation native bases outside of the disaster-affected areas. methods concerning Regional Problem,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.10, No.5, pp. 887-899, 2015.10. Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations: • City Planning Institute of Japan (CPIJ) References: • Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) [1] Fire and Disaster Management Agency, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, Government of Japan, “Damage caused by the 2018 Osaka Earthquake and the response of firefighting agencies (No.32),” August 20, 2019 (in Japanese). [2] The Yomiuri Shimbun, “Governor of Osaka also stranded in crowded road, traffic congestion 7 times due to earthquake,” September 17, 2018 (in Japanese). Name: Naoya Sekiya [3] Jiji Press, “Delayed recovery due to traffic congestion, negative chain,” June 24, 2018 (in Japanese). [4] U Hiroi, N. Sekiya, R. Nakajima, S. Waragai, and H. Hana- Affiliation: hara, “Questionnaire Survey concerning Stranded Commuters in Associate Professor, Interfaculty Initiative in In- Metropolitan Area in the East Japan Great Earthquake,” J. of So- formation Studies, The University of Tokyo cial Safety Science, Vol.15, pp. 343-353, 2011 (in Japanese). [5] U Hiroi, “Questionnaire Survey Concerning Stranded Commuters in Metropolitan Areas by The Approach of Bomb Cyclone on April 3, 2012,” J. of Architecture and Planning (Trans. of AIJ), Vol.80, No.714, pp. 1853-1861, 2015 (in Japanese). [6] Council on Support for Stranded Commuter, “Guidelines for Mea- Address: sures to Control Simultaneous Return to Home by Office,” Osaka 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan Prefectural Government, 2018 (in Japanese). Brief Career: [7] Cabinet Office, Government of Japan, “Review Meeting on Com- 2004-2007 Assistant Professor, Interfaculty Initiative in Information panies and Disaster Prevention (1st Meeting Minutes),” 2012 (in Japanese). Studies, The University of Tokyo 2007-2010 Lecturer, Faculty of Sociology, Toyo University [8] Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Hyogo Prefecture Disaster Re- sponse Headquarters, “Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake 1995 – 2010-2014 Associate Professor, Faculty of Sociology, Toyo University 1 Month Record in Hyogo Prefecture–,” 1995 (in Japanese). 2016- Associate Professor, Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, [9] Kobe City Fire Department, “Record of Firefighting Activities after The University of Tokyo the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake 1995 (Kobe city area),” Kobe City Disaster Prevention Corporation, 1995 (in Japanese). Academic Societies & Scientific Organizations: • Japan Society for Disaster Information Studies (JASDIS) [10] Kobe City Fire Department, “Overview of Kobe City’s Damage and Firefighting Activities in the 1995 Southern Hyogo Prefecture Earthquake,” Traffic Science Research Group Earthquake Special Report, 1995 (in Japanese). [11] D. Nakagawa and H. Kobayashi, “A Study on the Measures to Ad- dress Traffic Issues in the Event of an Earthquake Disaster: Lessons from the Hanshin Awaji Earthquake,” Journal of JSCE: Division D, Vol.62, No.1, pp. 187-206, 2006 (in Japanese). [12] The Asahi Shimbun, “JR West is fully restored, Osaka Monorail is suspended,” June 18, 2018 (in Japanese). [13] The Sankei Shimbun, “Osaka City considers instituting an “Emer- gency Declaration” system,” September 14, 2018 (in Japanese). [14] “Section 6.2. Spatial Movement after the Damage and its Issues,” Editorial Committee for the Report of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Disaster (Ed.), “Report of the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Disaster: General Issues Volume 3 – Function and Structure of Urban Safety System Against Earthquake Disaster,” pp. 370-386, Architectural Institute of Japan, 1999 (in Japanese).

224 Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 Questionnaire Survey on the Difﬁculty of Attending Work for Commuters After the 2018 Osaka Earthquake

Name: Shuntarou Waragai

Afﬁliation: Section Manager, Social Information Depart- ment, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd.

Address: 2-40-10 Nishinippori, Arakawa-ku, Tokyo 116-8581, Japan Brief Career: 2006- Section Manager, Social Information Department, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd. Academic Societies & Scientiﬁc Organizations: • Japan Society for Disaster Information Studies (JASDIS)

Name: Fusae Kukihara

Afﬁliation: Chief Researcher, Social Information Depart- ment, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd.

Address: 2-40-10 Nishinippori, Arakawa-ku, Tokyo 116-8581, Japan Brief Career: 2006-2010 Researcher, Marketing Research Department, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd. 2010-2013 Researcher, Business Planning Department Career Division, Intelligence, Ltd. 2013-2014 Researcher, Marketing & Consulting Division, AEON Marketing Co., Ltd. 2014- Chief Researcher, Social Information Department, Survey Research Center Co., Ltd.

Journal of Disaster Research Vol.15 No.2, 2020 225