地震、屋毀與傷亡：集集地震風險的因果分析

Earthquake, Housing Damage, and Fatality: A Causal-effect Analysis of Seismic Risk in Chi-Chi Earthquake

10.6128/CP.44.1.83

林冠慧(Kuan-Hui Elaine Lin)；林宗弘(Thung-Hong Lin)；胡伯維(Bo-Wei Hu)；張宜君(Yi-Chun Chang)；葉錦勳(Chin-Hsun Yeh)；詹忠翰(Chung-Han Chang)；劉季宇(Gee-Yu Liu)

地震風險 ； 脆弱性 ； 集集地震 ； 集合式住宅 ； 都市規劃 ； Seismic hazard ； Vulnerability ； Chi-Chi Earthquake ； Congregate housing ； Urban planning

都市與計劃

44卷1期（2017 / 03 / 31）

83 - 112

繁體中文

在聯合國國際減災辦公室及政府間氣候變遷小組的風險分析架構上，本研究將地震風險視為地震危害度 (hazard)、人口與建物暴露性 (exposure) 與脆弱性(vulnerability) 三項風險 (risk)因素的總體函數。我們以集集地震為分析案例，整合危害度、暴露性與脆弱性三類因素對房屋倒塌與人員死亡進行兩步驟的因果分析，以Poisson 迴歸模型進行估計。結果顯示，地震危害度、人口與建物暴露性與社會經濟脆弱性對集合式住宅倒塌棟數與全倒戶數皆有影響，即使在控制集合式住宅倒塌棟數與房屋全倒戶數之後，前述三項風險因素對地震死亡人數仍具統計顯著效應。其中地震的災害變量與人口建物暴露變量的效果最顯著，震動強度、斷層經過與集合式住宅倒塌三者加上其交互作用，是造成集集地震死亡的首要因素。相較之下社會脆弱性變量 ( 性別比、幼年人口、家戶所得、所得標準差) 雖然較弱但仍有顯著效應，會擴大集合式住宅棟數、全倒戶數與死亡人數。在學術上，本研究突顯跨領域理論與數據整合對分析與理解地震災難風險的重要性。在實務上，本研究建議應強化都市規劃、區域計畫、建築法規與社會扶助等機制，以降低對地震災害的暴險率與社會脆弱性。

Based on the disaster risk framework proposed by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, this study defines seismic risk as a function of seismic hazard, population-building exposure and vulnerability. The Chi-Chi, Taiwan, earthquake was used as a case study of a two-step cause and effect (housing damage and fatalities) analysis. Data (mostly at village scale) from various governmental and academic sources, including data for demographics, housing tax, family income tax, seismology, housing damage, and fatality, were used to construct four statistical models to examine the physical and social determinants underlying the seismic risk. The Poisson regression model was used to estimate the impacts of these factors on housing collapses and fatalities. The regression models showed that all factors significantly affected housing collapseand fatality. Seismic hazard and population-building exposure are the most key factors. Earthquake intensity, passage of the Chelungpu Fault, collapse of condominium and their intersectional effects explained most earthquake fatalities. Compared with those factors, social vulnerability variables (gender-female, young population, low family income, and income inequality) have a weaker influence; however these variables have a significant marginal effect on enlarging the fatalities. The contribution of this study is the use of an interdisciplinary approach that integrates theories and data across seismology, geology, geography and sociology to enrich seismic risk study. Regarding social implications, this study demonstrates the important role of national institutions, such as urban planning, regional planning, building regulation, and social welfare mechanisms, in minimizing exposure and social vulnerability to seismic risk.

1. 吳杰穎、曾志雄(2006)。影響九二一震災災後集合住宅都市更新重建之幾個因素探討。建築與規劃學報，7(2)，135-153。
   連結：
2. 吳治勳、陳淑惠、翁儷禎、吳英璋(2008)。臺灣九二一地震災難暴露對青少年創傷後壓力反應及社會關係的影響之性別差異。中華心理學刊，50(4)，367-381。
   連結：
3. 周士雄、施鴻志(2000)。環境風險管理決策中之公眾認知探討─以地震災害減緩措施為例。都市與計，27(3)，363-380。
   連結：
4. 林冠慧、張長義(2015)。脆弱性研究的演變與當前發展。臺大地理學報，77，49-82。
   連結：
5. 林耀盛、陳淑惠、洪福建、曾旭民(2005)。不同性別震災受創者心理社會反應之比較分析。臨床心理學刊，2(1)，31-40。
   連結：
6. 洪鴻智(2007)。自然災害後政府重建資源分配之決策因素分析：以九二一地震為例。公共行政學報（政大），23，95-124。
   連結：
7. 張宜君、林宗弘(2012)。不平等的災難：921 大地震下的受災風險與社會階層化。人文與社會研究集刊，24(2)，193-231。
   連結：
8. 許文耀、曾幼涵(2003)。九二一地震後災民的資源變化與心理症狀間的關係。中華心理衛生學刊，16(2)，1-19。
   連結：
9. 許文耀、曾幼涵(2004)。災難因子與心理症狀間之關係─以九二一地震為例。臨床心理學刊，1(1)，30-39。
   連結：
10. 陳建良、林祖嘉(2004)。九二一地震災後個別住宅重建動態資料分析及其成果檢討。住宅學報，13(2)，63-88。
    連結：
11. 湯京平、黃詩涵、黃坤山(2009)。災後重建政策與誘因排擠：以九二一地震後某社區營造集體行動為例。政治學報，48，1-31。
    連結：
12. Columbia Journalism Review (2012). Two years later, Haitian earthquake death toll in dispute, Columbia Jornalism Review, http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/one_year_later_haitian_earthqu.php, Sep. 23, 2015.
13. 公共電視（2012），「311 海嘯－ 釜石奇蹟」， http://www.pts.org.tw/program/Template1B_About.aspx?PNum=563&PURL=All_Doc_9，2013 年7 月5 日。
14. FEMA (2016). Hazus-MH analysis levels, Hazus, http://www.fema.gov/hazus-mh-analysislevels, Jan. 23, 2017.
15. UNISDR (2015). 2012 disaster in numbers-disaster profiles, Prevention Web, http://www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/statistics/, Nov. 17, 2015.
16. 財政部財政資訊中心（1999），「88 年度綜合所得稅申報初步核定統計專冊」，臺北：財政部財政資訊中心。
17. 內政部（2012），「內政統計查詢網」，http://statis.moi.gov.tw/micst/stmain.jsp?sys=100，2012 年1 月10 日。
18. 林宗弘（2016），新新聞周刊，「被壓垮在倒塌房子裡的年輕世代：從震災窺見世代不公的起源與縮影」，http://www.new7.com.tw/NewsView.aspx?i=TXT20160217152652KCG，2016 年4 月10 日。
19. USGS (2015). Historic earthquakes, USGS Earthquake Hazards Program, http://earthquake. usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1989_10_18.php, Sep. 23, 2015.
20. Munich RE (2015).Annual statistics, NatCatSERVICE, https://www.munichre.com/touch/naturalhazards/en/natcatservice/annual-statistics/index.html, Jan. 23, 2017.
21. Adger, W. N.(2006).Vulnerability.Global Environmental Change,16(3),268-281.
22. Agresti, A..Categorical Data Analysis.New York:Wiley.
23. Aldrich, D. P.,Sawada, Y.(2015).The physical and social determinants of mortality in the 3.11 Tsunami.Social Science & Medicine,124,66-75.
24. Anbarci, N.,Escaleras, M.,Register, C. A.(2005).Earthquake fatalities: The interaction of nature and political economy.Journal of Public Economics,89(9-10),1907-1933.
25. Aysan, Y.(1993).Vulnerability assessment.Natural Disasters: Protecting Vulnerable Communities,London:
26. Bankoff, G.,Frerks, G.,Hilhorst, D.(2004).Mapping Vulnerability: Disasters, Development and People.UK:Earthscan.
27. Blaikie, P.,Cannon, T.,Davis, I.,Wisner, B.(1994).At Risk: Natural Hazards, People's Vulnerability, and Disasters.London:Routledge.
28. Calvi, G. M.,Pinho, R.,Magenes, G.,Bommer, J. J.,Restrepo-Velez, L. F.,Crowley, H.(2006).Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years.ISET Journal of Earthquake Technology,43(3),75-104.
29. Cardona, O. D.,Ordaz, M. G.,Yamin, L. E.,Marulanda, M. C.,Barbat, A. H.(2008).Earthquake loss assessment for integrated disaster risk management.Journal of Earthquake Engineering,12(S2),48-59.
30. Cardona, O. D.,van Aalst, M. K.,Birkmann, J.,Fordham, M.,McGregor, G.,Perez, R.,Pulwarty, R. S.,Schipper, E. L. F.,Sinh, B. T..Determinants of risk: Exposure and vulnerability.Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation,New York:
31. CDC. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)(2011).Post-earthquake injuries treated at a field hospital-Haiti 2010.Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report,59(51),1673-1677.
32. Chen, W. S.,Huang, B. S.,Chen, Y. G.,Lee, Y. H.,Yang, C. N.,Lo, C. H.,Chang, H. C.,Sung, Q. C.,Huang, N. W.,Lin, C. C.,Sung, S. H.,Lee, K. J.(2001).Chi-Chi earthquake: A case study on the role of thrust-ramp structures for generating earthquakes.Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America,91(5),986-994.
33. Cutter, S. L.(1996).Vulnerability to environmental hazards.Progress in Human Geography,20(4),529-539.
34. Cutter, S. L.,Boruff, B. J.,Shirley, W. L.(2003).Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards.Social Science Quarterly,84(2),242-261.
35. Cutter, S. L.,Mitchell, J. T.,Scott, M. S.(2000).Revealing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study of Georgetown County, South Carolina.Annals of the Association of American Geographers,90(4),713-737.
36. Donner, W.,Rodríguez, H.(2008).Population composition, migration, and inequality: The influence of demographic changes on disaster risk and vulnerability.Social Forces,87(2),1089-1114.
37. Enarson, E.(1998).Through women's eyes: A gendered research agenda for disaster social science.Disasters,22(2),157-173.
38. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency)(2010).,Washington:Federal Emergency Management Agency.
39. Fothergill, A.(1996).Gender, risk, and disaster.International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters,14(1),33-56.
40. ICSU (International Council for Science)(2010).Earth System Science for Global Sustainability: The Grand Challenges.Paris:International Council for Science.
41. IPCC(2014).Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability.New York:Cambridge University Press.
42. IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)(2012).Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation.New York:Cambridge University Press.
43. ISSC (International Social Sciences Council)(2013).World Social Science Report: Changing Global Environments.Paris:International Social Sciences Council.
44. Johnston, R. J.,Gregory, D.,Pratt, G.,Watts, M.(2001).The Dictionary of Human Geography.Oxford:Blackwell.
45. Kahn, M. E.(2005).The death toll from natural disasters: the role of income, geography, and institutions.Review of Economics and Statistics,87(2),271-284.
46. Kasperson, J. X.,Kasperson, R. E.(2005).The Social Contours of Risk: Risk Analysis, Corporations and the Globalization of Risk.London:Earthscan.
47. Keefer, P.,Neumayer, E.,Plümper, T.(2011).Earthquake propensity and the politics of mortality prevention.World Development,39(9),1530-1541.
48. Kellenberg, D. K.,Mobarak, A. M.(2008).Does rising income increase or decrease damage risk from natural disasters?.Journal of Urban Economics,63(3),788-802.
49. Khazai, B.,Daniell, J. E.,Wenzel, F.(2011).The March 2011 Japan earthquake: Analysis of losses, impacts, and implications for the understanding of risks posed by extreme events.Technikfolgenabschätzung - Theorie und Praxis,20(3),22-33.
50. King, G.,Keohane, R. O.,Verba, S.(1994).Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
51. Klinenberg, E.(2002).Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
52. Lay, T.,Wallace, T. C.(1995).Modern Global Seismology.Combridge:Academic Press.
53. Lin, K. H.,Chang, Y. C.,Liu, G. Y.,Chan, C. H.,Lin, T. H.,Yeh, C. H.(2015).An interdisciplinary perspective on social and physical determinants of seismic risk.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,15(10),2173-2182.
54. Lin, T. H.(2015).Governing natural disasters: State capacity, democracy, and human vulnerability.Social Forces,93(3),1267-1300.
55. Ma, K. F.,Lee, C. T.,Tsai, Y. B.,Shin, T. C.,Mori, J.(1999).The Chi-Chi Taiwan earthquake: Large surface displacements on an inland thrust fault.Eos,80(50),605-611.
56. Pelling, M.(2003).The Vulnerability of Cities: Natural Disasters and Social Resilience.London:Earthscan.
57. Rashed, T.,Weeks, J. R.(2003).Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas.International Journal of Geographical Information Science,17(6),547-576.
58. RMS (Risk Management Solutions, Inc.)(1994).Earthquake Loss Estimation Method-HAZUS97 Technical Manual.Washington:National Institute of Building Sciences.
59. Thomas, D.,Goudie, A.(2003).The Dictionary of Physical Geography.Oxford:Blackwell.
60. Timmerman, P.(1981).Vulnerability, Resilience and the collapse of Society.Toronto:University of Toronto.
61. Turner, B. L.,Kasperson, R. E.,Matson, P. A.,McCarthy, J. J.,Corell, R. W.,Christensen, L.,Eckley, N.,Kasperson, J. X.,Luers, A.,Martello, M. L.,Polsky, C.,Pulsipher, A.,Schiller, A.(2003).A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,100(14),8074-8079.
62. Tyagunov, S.,Grunthal, G.,Wahlstrom, R.,Stempniewski, L.,Zschau, J.(2006).Seismic risk mapping for Germany.Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,6(4),573-586.
63. UNDRO(1980).Natural Disasters and Vulnerability Analysis.Geneva:UNDRO.
64. Uzarski, J.,O'Rourke, M.,Abrahamson, N.,Amin, N. R.(2001).Inntroduction.Earthquake Spectra Special,17(S1),1-3.
65. Watts, M. J.,Bohle, H. G.(1993).The space of vulnerability: the causal structure of hunger and famine.Progress in Human Geography,17(1),43-67.
66. Wu, Y. M.,Hsiao, N. C.,Teng, T. L.(2004).Relationships between strong ground motion peak values and seismic loss during the 1999 Chi-Chi, Taiwan earthquake.Natural Hazards,32(3),357-373.
67. Wu, Y. M.,Hsiao, N. C.,Teng, T. L.,Shin, T. C.(2002).Near real-time seismic damage assessment of the rapid reorting system.Terrestrial Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences,13(3),313-324.
68. Yeh, C. H.,Loh, C. H.,Tsai, K. C.(2006).Overview of Taiwan earthquake loss estimation system.Natural Hazards,37(1-2),23-37.
69. 白志宏(2006)。博士論文(博士論文)。桃園，中央大學土木工程研究所。
70. 吳杰穎、江宜錦(2008)。台灣天然災害統計指標體系建構與分析。地理學報，51，65-84。
71. 李宗義、林宗弘、謝志誠(2012)。重建信任網絡：九二一地震後集合住宅的重建成敗。台灣社會學會2012 年度研討會，臺中:
72. 周桂田(2003)。從「全球化風險」到「全球在地化風險」之研究進路：對貝克理論的批判思考。台灣社會學刊，31，153-188。
73. 周桂田(2007)。獨大的科學理性與隱沒（默）的社會理性之「對話」：在地公眾、科學專家與國家的風險文化探討。台灣社會研究季刊，56，1-63。
74. 林宗弘、張宜君(2013)。天災也是人禍－社會科學領域的災難研究。風和日麗的背後—水、科技、災難，新竹:
75. 陳亮全(2005)。水災與土石流風險認知調查執行報告水災與土石流風險認知調查執行報告,臺北:國家災害防救科技中心。
76. 陳亮全、吳杰穎、劉怡君、李宜樺(2007)。土石流潛勢區內居民疏散避難行為與決策之研究－以泰利颱風為例。中華水土保持學報，38(4)，325-340。
77. 葉錦勳(2003)。台灣地震損失評估系統—TELES。臺北:國家地震工程研究中心。
78. 蕭江碧(2001)。,臺北:內政部建築研究所。

1. 廖興中,張鎧如,李天申(2020)。新北市里層級之水災暨坡地災害脆弱性分析：全盤型脆弱性管理架構的初步應用。行政暨政策學報，71，89-137。
2. 林宗弘(2019)。數位貧窮與天災風險資訊來源：來自臺灣傳播調查的證據。新聞學研究，138，131-162。
3. 林宗弘,周偉賢(2019)。社會資本、制度創新與九二一災後集合住宅重建。中華心理衛生學刊，32(4)，367-405。
4. 蕭新煌、許耿銘、林宗弘(2018)。邁向世界風險社會？台灣民眾的社會資本、風險感知與風險因應行為。調查研究：方法與應用，40，127-166。