Suchergebnisse

This study aims to explore the current "double ageing" (demographic ageing of residents and physical ageing of facilities) in high-rise (over 20 stories by the Japanese Government's definition) residential buildings in Tokyo, where the rate of ageing has increased most rapidly since the late 1990s, compared to those of other cities and high-rise residential buildings worldwide. First, the trend of demographic ageing in the districts where high-rise residential buildings are concentrated is analysed. The results show that demographic ageing in high-rise residential buildings is faster than in other residential buildings because the age group of the residents is concentrated across two generations: the generation born in 1946–1955 and the generation born in 1966–75. Second, the relationship between demographic and physical ageing was examined through an online survey of 978 residents of high-rise residential buildings conducted in January 2021. A generation gap in values regarding their high-rise residential buildings was clearly identified. Third, the cause and result of the generation concentration and gap were investigated via an interview survey of 26 informants extracted from the online survey. Three main findings emerged: (a) the ageing of the generation born in 1946–1955 has given rise to housing insecurity because of the decline in income, (b) the high rate of singles within the generation born in 1966–1975 may be as a result of housing insecurity after their retirement, and (c) the introduction of social distancing has accelerated the substantial "ageing" of relatively good facilities, but a straightforward generational conflict was not fully deciphered in this article because of lifestyle diversification over generations and organisational culture of management associations.

In this paper, based on my research about the mutual aids between local govern-ments after the Great East Japan Disaster (3.11), I try to describe the process in which I have collected data based on typical theories and through the interaction with informants belonging to local governments in order to discuss the possible relationship between data and theories. First of all, I evaluate two recent empirical studies both of which reached one similar conclusion on one of the typical theoretical perspective shared by most researchers on Japanese society after 3.11. I name this perspective "divergent theory" because that perspective should generally point out the divergence of two incompatible forms of norm or narratives on political responses to that disaster. Secondly, I describe the data-producing process in which I have collected the data about the decision-making of mutual aid implementation initially through structured questionnaires which were planned based on those static theories and then I modified these data through face-to-face interviews. Consequently, I have come to interpret these political responses to disaster as convergence rather than divergence referring not only to my own process-produced data but to Luhmann's sociological theory which was produced by comparative observation of interactions within political processes. Finally, I describe reactions of my informants who were introduced to my theoretical interpretation as part of the open-ended process of a reflexive relationship between data and theories in my research, which should be called "action research."

In this paper, based on my research about the mutual aids between local govern-ments after the Great East Japan Disaster (3.11), I try to describe the process in which I have collected data based on typical theories and through the interaction with informants belonging to local governments in order to discuss the possible relationship between data and theories. First of all, I evaluate two recent empirical studies both of which reached one similar conclusion on one of the typical theoretical perspective shared by most researchers on Japanese society after 3.11. I name this perspective "divergent theory" because that perspective should generally point out the divergence of two incompatible forms of norm or narratives on political responses to that disaster. Secondly, I describe the data-producing process in which I have collected the data about the decision-making of mutual aid implementation initially through structured questionnaires which were planned based on those static theories and then I modified these data through face-to-face interviews. Consequently, I have come to interpret these political responses to disaster as convergence rather than divergence referring not only to my own process-produced data but to Luhmann's sociological theory which was produced by comparative observation of interactions within political processes. Finally, I describe reactions of my informants who were introduced to my theoretical interpretation as part of the open-ended process of a reflexive relationship between data and theories in my research, which should be called "action research."