Prof. Hiroyuki Shibusawa (p), Asahi Kawai, Itsuki Tahara, Mingji Cui

This study analyzes the regional economic impacts of large-scale tsunami disasters in Japan under conditions of long-term population decline, with a comparative focus on the Pacific and Japan Sea coastal regions. Japan is projected to experience continuous population shrinkage over the next three decades, and the pace of demographic decline varies significantly across regions. In many coastal areas, rapid aging and youth outmigration are occurring simultaneously, making demographic change a critical factor influencing disaster vulnerability and recovery capacity.
A dynamic interregional input–output (IRIO) model based on a 47-prefecture, four-sector framework is developed to capture spatial economic interactions across Japan. Regional population levels are incorporated as time-dependent variables affecting household final demand and labor supply constraints. Two simulation scenarios are constructed. In the first scenario, population levels are assumed to remain constant over time, and a large-scale tsunami shock is introduced to estimate disaster impacts under a stable demographic structure. In the second scenario, projected prefectural population decline is incorporated exogenously, and the same magnitude of tsunami shock is applied. Comparing these scenarios allows the isolation of demographic effects on disaster outcomes.
The simulations assume a large-scale tsunami affecting Pacific coastal prefectures, and an equivalent shock is hypothetically applied to Japan Sea coastal regions to examine how differences in demographic structure influence economic losses and recovery paths. Pacific regions generally contain larger population and economic concentrations, whereas Japan Sea regions tend to exhibit higher rates of population decline. The analysis evaluates differences in gross output losses, demand contraction speed, and long-term recovery trajectories across regions.

Short-term (immediate), medium-term (5–10 years), and long-term (20–30 years) horizons are considered to assess how ongoing demographic decline shifts post-disaster economic levels. The results suggest that regions experiencing rapid depopulation may face structurally lower post-disaster economic equilibria, while more populous regions may exhibit relatively faster recovery.
By integrating demographic trends into disaster impact assessment, this study moves beyond static loss estimation and provides policy insights for disaster risk evaluation and regional planning in shrinking and aging societies.

Prof. Kiyoshi Yonemoto (p)

Recent population decline in Japan as well as in some countries in eastern Europe is, combined with the growths in urban agglomerations, causing the concentration of the national population in some limited “central” regions; the concentration, which deteriorates the “periphery” regions in most cases, is sometimes considered economically efficient and even to be promoted.
However, when regions are facing disaster risks, traditional risk theories such as the one for portfolio management tell us too much concentration is not the best; businesses (and thus the populations) should be diversified and not to be located in a few places. According to the theory, the degree of concentration/dispersion depends on the relative magnitude of the returns (losses) to their correlation. Noting the levels of the disaster damages as well as the economies are correlated over regions, and moreover, according to the modern behavioral economic theory, the state-dependent “utility” levels can be intercorrelated, this study describes the theoretical model that determines the “optimal” distribution of the population over the regions and characterizes its “solutions.”
In addition, using Bulgarian regional disaster (e.g., flooding) and economic data as well as Japanese data, several numerical examples for the application of the model are indicated. In general, as people are more risk averse, the population needs to be dispersed. An increase in covariance results in either concentration or dispersion depending on the locations.

Dr. Eliska Hudcova (p)

Rural areas occupy an ambivalent position in modern consciousness, often perceived as having a lower standard of living and a lower density of services, as well as conservatism, backwardness, and rigidity. In contrast, there is a romanticised ideal of a traditional community, positive norms, and security. One of the constitutive elements of the countryside is agriculture and farmers, who create a network of relationships, basic assistance, and rapid responses to unexpected events in the regions. Through a study of 288 medium-sized to large farms in the Czech Republic (averaging 2,608 hectares and 51 employees), the research identifies nonproductive activities that are considered publicly beneficial. The basic research question is: How is the social function of agriculture perceived by practitioners, and which forms of assistance are most prevalent? Findings indicate that farmers primarily stabilise regions through landscape maintenance, maintenance of public roads, and logistical support for municipalities and local associations. While direct social support for individuals remains secondary, the provision of local food and catering is limited to small-scale production and their own processing. The paper concludes that these "unsolicited but often expected" activities create a vital network of reciprocity. By fulfilling these roles, farmers transcend their economic identity to become influential political actors. Their involvement not only preserves social stability in a changing world but also actively shapes the character and future of rural resilience.

Prof. Hans Westlund, Dr. Kakuya Matsushima (p)

For obvious reasons, disaster research’s main focus is on forecasting and preventing disasters. However, when the most necessary functions in a disaster-stricken area are restored, are we then back in “business as usual”? The answer is of course no. An external chock like a disaster often means substantial material and economic losses, as well as psychological stress for entrepreneurs and households. For many, the question “should I stay or should I go?” arises. Which factors influence such decisions?

This presentation is based on the assumption that there is a fundamental difference between city-regions’ and rural areas’ resilience capacity after a disaster. City-regions have such a concentration of human and material resources that they, even after a disaster, have the ability to survive and “bounce back” (Borsekova & Nijkamp 2019, World Disaster Report 2010). Rural areas lack this concentration of resources, which means that their resilience capacity is much lower.

Can rural areas strengthen their resilience capacity? In this presentation we focus on two interrelated and partly overlapping factors that have received little attention in earlier research: amenities and local social capital. Starting from a taxonomy of various types of amenities and natural resources, we discuss how they separately or in combinations might strengthen the attractiveness of a rural area for a) residents and visitors, and b) from a producer and consumer perspective, respectively.