Residents' Perceptions of Disaster Heritage in Post-Disaster Communities: Implications for Utilization Policy and the Risk of Community Burden

Disaster heritage sites are increasingly used for disaster education and risk communication; however, the perceptions of local residents—key stakeholders—remain insufficiently understood. This study examines how residents’ perceptions of disaster heritage influence attitudes toward its preservation. A mail survey was conducted in Ishinomaki, Japan, a city affected by the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, where two public disaster heritage sites are maintained. Based on 306 responses, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and structural equation modeling (SEM) were employed to examine residents’ perceptions. The analysis examined multiple perceptual dimensions, including perceived importance, perceived necessity, and three latent factors identified through EFA: Disaster Lesson, Burden, and Willingness to Involve. The structural model showed that perceived disaster lessons significantly increased importance (R 2 = 0.77), necessity, and willingness to be involved. It also increased perceived burden (R 2 = 0.26). However, importance did not significantly influence necessity, suggesting that residents evaluate disaster heritage through separate evaluative dimensions rather than a single evaluative process. These findings imply a two-layer evaluation structure consisting of recognition of social value (importance) and local acceptance (necessity). The findings highlight the double-edged nature of disaster lessons: communicating disaster-related lessons may strengthen support for preservation and involvement while simultaneously increasing perceived burden. The results suggest that developing resilience through disaster heritage preservation may entail hidden burdens for residents and that risks associated with preservation may have been overlooked. Accordingly, disaster heritage policies should balance disaster education and memory transmission with attention to community burdens through community-sensitive policy design.