著者

春原 浩樹

出版者

GRIPS Policy Research Center

雑誌

GRIPS Discussion Papers

巻号頁・発行日

vol.17-18, 2018-03

---

ニュージーランドでは,改正後の「地震に弱い建築物制度」が2017年7月1日に施行された.本研究では,ニュージーランドと日本の法令,両国政府発出文書その他の文献の調査,ニュージーランドのEPB登録簿及び日本の所管行政庁から公表された耐震診断結果のデータの整理・分析等を通じて同制度の内容,適用の現状等を調査し,日本の耐震改修促進法による制度との比較分析を行った.その結果,同制度は,対象を限定して耐震化工事を義務付ける,耐震改修の目標性能レベルは現行基準の1/3とする,耐震診断結果は2段階の耐震等級を付して公表する,地震に弱い建築物であることを建築物に掲示させるなど,対象建築物,義務付けの内容,目標性能レベル,公表の内容や方法等の点で日本とは異なるアプローチを採用していることが分かった.New Zealand reviewed its policy for earthquake-prone buildings (EPB) and implemented a new system for managing EPBs as of July 1, 2017. This study explored the details and current state of its application and compared them to those of the similar program in Japan under the Act on Promotion of Seismic Retrofit of Buildings, through a survey of the respective laws and regulations of New Zealand and Japan, their publications, and other literature as well as analyses of the EPB register and by tabulating and analyzing the seismic assessment data of buildings published by the relevant agencies in Japan. It is concluded that the EPB program is taking an approach different from that of Japan in the applicable buildings, requirements, target performance, contents and methodology of disclosure. For instance, the New Zealand system requires seismic upgrading only on limited groups of buildings, a performance target of one third of the current level imposed on new construction, its seismic assessment to be published in two levels, and the building to be labeled as an EPB if so determined.

著者

春原 浩樹 水山 高久 武田 文男

出版者

GRIPS Policy Research Center

雑誌

GRIPS Discussion Papers

巻号頁・発行日

vol.16-32, 2017-03

---

災害危険区域は昭和25(1950)年の建築基準法制定時に創設された制度で,これまでに22千箇所以上が指定され,区域外への移転を支援する制度も用意されているが,区域内にはまだ多数の住宅・建築物が存在する.本研究は,災害危険区域について,国会会議録に基づくこれまでの議論の整理,国土交通省の調査に基づくこれまでの指定状況の整理,関係県・市町村の条例に基づく現在の建築禁止・建築制限の内容の複数の指定理由にまたがる横断的な調査・分析を行うとともに,区域内の建築物の安全性向上のための改修支援策の事例を調査することにより,災害危険区域における今後の対応の可能性を検討しようとするものである.The disaster risk area designation was created when the Building Standard Law was enacted in 1950, and so far more than 22, 000 areas have received the designation. Assistance programs for reloca-tion to a non-designated area are available, but a large number of buildings, residential or otherwise, still remain in designated areas. This study aims to explore possible future policies for disaster risk areas by conducting a systematic review of past debates on the issue using the Diet records; an overview of past designations based on the survey conducted by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism; and a cross-sectional analysis of present prohibitions and restrictions on buildings imposed by the respective municipal and/or prefectural ordinances relative to the type of hazard identified for the designation. The study also includes a survey of the actual measures to promote renovation in disaster risk areas with the objective of upgrading the safety of buildings therein.