Earthquake in Pakistan – October 2008

Another major earthquake has occurred; this time in Pakistan, of magnitude 6.4, on about 29 October 2008. As with many reported earthquakes, it caused death and devastation to an impoverished region.

Death and suffering from these earthquakes have a direct social and psychological impact on survivors. Economic consequences follow as a result of direct losses and there are enormous costs of organising the rescue operations and additional unbudgeted expenditure for rehabilitation. These outcomes eventuate due to political and social norms overriding knowledge and technology in earthquake mitigation.

In most of these earthquakes such colossal loss of life and damage to property could have been minimised if structures were designed and constructed in a manner to withstand seismic loads. Similar conclusions have been drawn in reports on devastation caused by other major earthquakes around the world, including New Zealand from the 1931 Napier earthquake.

Sufficient information is currently available worldwide to be able to construct buildings to withstand earthquake forces. Professional engineers and scientists, even in most developing countries, possess the necessary expertise, knowledge and skills to design and construct earthquake–resistant structures. There are many highly skilled earthquake engineers in New Zealand, the US and Japan, and in other countries, yet people do not always benefit from this sea of knowledge.

It is possibly a little known fact that the Sixth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering (WCEE) was hosted by India, and Indian delegations and speakers have actively participated in these conferences held every four years. In the Twelfth WCEE held in 2000 in Auckland, New Zealand, Prof. Anand S Arya contributed a paper titled “Non-engineered Construction in Developing Countries”.

“The safety of the non-engineered buildings from the fury of earthquakes is a subject of highest priority in view of the fact that in the moderate to severe seismic zones of the developing world more than 90 percent of the population is still living and working in such buildings, and that most losses of lives during earthquakes have occurred due to their collapse. ...

The present disaster management policies of the governments in the developing countries do not address the issue of preventive actions for the safety of such buildings toward seismic risk reduction… ... and the building by-laws of municipalities and corporations are silent about earthquake resistance in buildings. The Codes and Guidelines developed through the standard making bodies remain recommendatory documents of good engineering practices, and their implementation depends upon the decision of the Heads of Agencies, Departs (sic), Organisations, Institutions owning the buildings and structures in the public and private sectors. Private individuals have by and large remained uninformed” - Arya, 2000

Unfortunately, reports and recommendations of experts seem to have collected dust and got buried in the archives. Hence, the wealth of knowledge and experience available in most developing countries remains far from effective realisation for the benefit of the society.

Application of codes and standards is generally confined to the design of major industrial structures, bridges, power stations, water supply and wastewater disposal facilities, and other similar structures. These are mostly designed and supervised by private consultants or other specialist structural engineers having the required expertise and skills. However, the process of obtaining building permits and enforcement of codes and standards for design and construction of the majority of buildings in most developing countries is lax.

In smaller towns in India, for instance (characterised by Bhuj in Gujarat which was the worst affected area), seismic requirements are almost non-existent in building regulations for obtaining building permits.

In India and some other developing countries owners sometimes pay bribes to obtain building permits.

It appears that as time passes, people tend to forget the devastating effects of individual earthquakes. The value of good engineering practices also fades with time. Non-compliance of the building codes due to inadequate legislation continues to become a major factor in the construction of unsafe buildings.

It is common knowledge that Pakistan, India and many other developing countries are located in high seismically-active zones. It is also well known that New Zealand, like many other countries, falls in a high seismically active zone. The earthquake that hit Kobe (1995) in Japan and several earlier earthquakes in Japan show that the probability of damage to buildings and infrastructure on areas of reclaimed land due to a major earthquake can be devastating. It is far more alarming in densely populated cities. New Zealand’s seat of government, Wellington, is clearly a city that is situated in an extremely hazardous location and is at potential risk. The 1855 earthquake is an indication of the risk. Refer to http://www.gw.govt.nz/council-publications/pdfs/The_1855_Wairarapa_Earthquake_Symposium_Proceedings_Volume_Web_Version.pdf

It is a difficult task to enact legislation to deal with seismic design of buildings in developing countries and seismic evaluation of existing buildings and strengthening of buildings found to be unsafe. The recent earthquake in Pakistan and the major earthquakes of recent years such as in Gujarat, India and in Sichuan, China (2008), and other major earthquakes, have been far too tragic to be ignored. Lessons need to be learnt by the public, and particularly by the policy-makers (including engineers and scientists) and law-makers of all countries in seismic zones, as well as those of developing countries, who should act without delay.

Not only should the buildings of high importance factor be designed and constructed by competent engineers but seismic detailing should be provided in all types of structures including non-engineered buildings such as residential dwellings. There needs to be a sensible balance of responsibilities between those affected such as the central government, state governments, local authorities, individuals and businesses.

As an example of what is being done in New Zealand, visit these websites:
http://www.nzsee.org.nz/PUBS/2006AISBEGUIDELINES_Corr_06a.pdf
http://www.nzsee.org.nz/PUBS/ADE2007.pdf

Having experienced the aftermath of an earthquake and seen the terrible damage in human terms – the pain and suffering, the economics of lost livelihoods, bankrupt businesses and the fear and guilt – we must realise that the investment in enforcing seismic codes on a nation-wide basis and strengthening unsafe structures in risk areas is a smaller price to pay.

A worthwhile initiative is the Global Earthquake Model (GEM) http://www.globalquakemodel.org/
http://www.globalquakemodel.org/RossSteinsVisionSpeech.html