National 4 (Spotlight Weekly)

"We Still Lack Risk Perception"

— Amod Mani Dixit

AMOD MANI DIXIT, general secretary and executive director of Nepal Society For Earthquake Technology-Nepal (NSET), has been working in the area of earthquake preparedness, risk and general awareness. In the aftermath of Tsunami-triggered devastations and huge human losses in South and Southeast Asia, Dixit spoke to KESHAB POUDEL on various issues related to the level of preparedness in Nepal, which also lies in active seismic belt. Excerpts:

Since Nepal lies in the seismically active zone, it has to be alert about earthquakes. How do you assess the recent Tsunami tragedy?

The Tsunami in Asia had its own specifics. First, this was a very big earthquake in the world history measuring 9 Richter scale. Second, it is a submarine earthquake, which means that the earthquake took place at the bottom of the sea at the rock depth of about 8 kilometers. In that way it was a shallow earthquake. Because it was shallow, all the energy could very quickly come up to the top of the rocks. It created huge wave and a lot of energy was concentrated at the place and then the waves traveled to the coastal areas with above ten meters of wave, which destroyed the coastal areas. The third specific of this large event was the extent of the coverage received globally. We have witnessed the devastation and stories. The question now is what we can learn from this event.

Was there any way to reduce the casualties from Tsunami in those coastal areas?

Had the Tsunami occurred not in the Indian Ocean but in the Pacific, the death would have been much less and the loss of property also would have been less because there is early warning system with preparedness and mitigation in place there. There is a lot of awareness and a lot of knowledge is transmitted to the people there. People in the coastal region starting from the decision makers up to the very common man knows what is Tsunami and how to lessen the impact of it. Because of this preparedness and level of knowledge imparted to the people and technologies, the level of destruction would have been less had it occurred in the Pacific.

Are we threatened by similarly big earthquake?

The assessment shows that there are areas of potential sources of earthquakes in Nepal's Himalayas. There could be earthquakes as big as 8.3 or 8.4 in Richter scale. There will be huge earthquake that could take place in our part of the world at any time and at any day.

Do we have any rough idea when such quake could hit us?

We don't know exactly when it would take place. Such quake is already overdue looking into the historical facts and their past frequencies.

What will be the effect of such quake?

There are certain empirical methods that can be used to measure the effect or to do any assessment of potential earthquake. There will be around 40,000 deaths in an earthquake that could cause the level of shaking as what had happened in 1934 A.D. In terms of injured people requiring hospitalization, there will be estimated 100,000 of them. In terms of damage of infrastructures, 90 percent of the water supply pipeline will become dysfunctional, electricity supply will reduce by 50 percent and 60 percent of bridges will be out of order. Besides, telephone and mobile phone will go dysfunctional because their towers and buildings are located in earthquake hazardous zone and their buildings are not earthquake resistant. That will isolate the valley from the rest of the world. This is a bleak scenario and this is what our studies have portrayed. We cannot prevent the earthquake and it will cause us tragedies like the Tsunami in Indonesia.

What are the works that NSET is doing?

We are doing capability enhancing and emergency response. We are now implementing a regional program to enhance the emergency response capabilities in five countries. Apart from Nepal, we are helping India, Bangladesh, Philippines and Indonesia in developing their capabilities in emergency response and institutionalizing capability. We don't need to be dependant all the time on people from other developed countries to start the emergency response. This is a five-year program and is basically for enhancing the capability. We are focusing on medical response, collapsed structure search and rescue and hospital preparedness.

How effective are the programs of NSET?

In the last nine years of works by the NSET, Nepalese people as well as international agencies have appreciated our efforts. We have got many national and international acclaim in our bag. People rewarded us. When I look at the scenario, to tell you frankly, I feel very dwarfed. Are there any changes in the last ten years? How many potential deaths have we avoided? That is the main question. The ultimate question is: how many people can we save if there is a large earthquake. We have done some jobs in Kathmandu and developed the methodology of earthquake safety. We have also developed the concept of what it means by the earthquake preparedness in poor countries like Nepal. Our programs have shown that poverty of the country is not a hindrance (in these efforts); rather they may be conducive. It is very easy to implement the modern concept of preparedness and earthquake safety even in a country of weak economy like Nepal because the policymakers are talking about integrating development projects with earthquake safety and disaster safety mechanisms.

What about these integrated methods?

Policy makers are talking about integrating these methods with development. They are talking about the community-based initiative, self-help, and cooperation. They are talking about the way to mobilize the resources available within society. In that case, Nepal is wonderful place where we can implement that. The question once again is how many lives can we save? NSET has been working in 20 communities in 20 schools. We can say that we have brought the message to 200,000 people. Our target area covers about two million people of Kathmandu valley. As such, we might have reached ten percent of the people in terms of earthquake awareness who really know what to do during an earthquake. Overall, I am not satisfied with the present result. We could have achieved much more and covered almost all the population. The level of preparedness is very little and the level of actual earthquake mitigation measure is very little. Despite this, I can say that strong and solid steps are being taken in this direction.

How do you see the implementation of building code?

The implementation of building code by Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan is a positive step. We are happy that the government has started to implement the building code. It will take another decade to notice the result but this is a good beginning. We sometime require transforming the mindset of the people from zero safety to hundred percent safety level. Perhaps, it will take another ten years to come up with results. Ministry of Health has already started working to implement safety measures in the hospitals so that they are safe. Nobody wants to see the repetition of what happened in Bhuj of Gujarat.

What do you suggest for old building constructed before the implementation of building code?

There are old buildings including historical monuments, palaces and temples. Many of those buildings have possibility of surviving because of inherent strength built into them. The only thing is that many of them are without repair. So they are vulnerable. We can repair them and make them resistant. Then, there is the next generation of buildings, which were built after the Second World War when we started importing cement but we did not import the discipline associated with cement and concrete. We look at a beam of concrete as a beam of timber. We missed the importance of interconnection of wooden beam and concrete beam. When we started building houses with pillar system we committed more mistakes. The buildings that were built 30 years ago are the most vulnerable ones.

How vulnerable are the new buildings?

The new buildings are more vulnerable than the older ones. Many of the buildings did not obey minimum requirements of the building guidelines. That is the reason our report showed that 60 percent of the buildings will be knocked down by large earthquake in the valley. Buildings are main sources of risk in Nepal as over eighty percent of risks are associated with it in Kathmandu. The remaining twenty percent of the risk is associated with the lack of medical preparedness and lack of other systems. Building is the main cause of risk. The life of the building is supposed to be 30 years and they need periodic renovation. If we start the implementation of building code now, the risk will reduce after five years. Regarding the old building, we have developed manual. We have technologies to correct the things by retro-fitting. Here we can do it in much cheaper way. There are knowledge and technologies. What is required is commitment from all the people.

How safe is our airport in case of major earthquake?

Our international airport, according to our empirical study, lies on the stable ground. We can say that our runway is safe. But that is not enough. What is required is the efficiency of management in handling the aircraft at the time of such a major disaster. How many lifters are there in the airport and how many volume of goods can they lift. Is it possible to unload huge plane using Damlo and Doko (traditional bamboo baskets)? We need to have enough lifters. Another question is how to stop jamming the airport. Is it difficult to buy air lifter? I think the government has to take all these necessary things into consideration before any major disaster strikes us. This is what we call emergency rescue system, which we don't have.

What are the important steps for preparedness?

Two things are important when you talk about disaster preparedness. First, it has to be a comprehensive work, as it should be multi-sectoral approach. Road Department must make sure that the roads and bridges are safe. Whoever is helping the Road Department should integrate this into their plan. Frankly speaking the perception of risk is still not there. They do not perceive the risk as such and don't internalize into day-to-day actions. If you talk about it, they will say yes we know it and that's it.

How do you see the perception about risk at decision-making level?

The perception about risk in decision-making level is still lacking. This is what makes people more vulnerable. Everybody should do disaster preparedness. It is multi-hazard approach. It is not only earthquake but also other disasters like avalanches, floods and landslides that have risks associated with human life and property. Ultimately what is required is a culture at all levels including at household and prime minister level about the risk and mitigation. We did have some household culture in the past. We did have indigenous level of culture on how to face the flood, landslides or earthquake. There is a necessity for forcefully bringing this practice into the mindset of the people and their behavior. For that what we require is a very strong policy commitment as well as legal instruments to support. What are missing in Nepal are such kinds of mechanisms - which could take into consideration the totality of disaster scenario.

Do we have system for emergency response?

We do have some systems for emergency response. Ministry of Home is responsible to provide such emergency response. In the event of incidents like the landslides, floods and snow avalanches, they mobilize helicopters to rescue people. In the case of 1988 earthquake, it was very good coordinated approach and the whole country was behind it. Although the reconstruction and rehabilitation part was missing at some level, the response was very effective. In 1993 floods in South Central Nepal, it was managed well but it could have been better managed. For small and middle level disaster, the present level of apparatus and preparedness is alright. But to cope with the impact of big earthquakes like in 1934, it is very little.

How do you see the early warning system?

Everybody talks about the early warning system and others. It is not only the early warning system but actual the transmission of the knowledge to the people which saves live. It requires a lot of efforts, as it is not one-time affair. It requires a social mechanism to be able to do that. It goes into the question of how vulnerable communities are? What will be inhererent remedies for them? Instrument will not lessen their vulnerabilities. It is not only a question of implementing building code or predicting or not predicting earthquake but it also has to look at the social, cultural and economic background.

Do we have a proper mechanism for preparedness?

We are yet to develop proper mechanisms. Now more than 3 billion dollar is pledged for Tsunami victims. People are asking the question whether the money will be distributed properly or not. If there is no proper mechanism, distribution is going to be more difficult. Do these countries have proper mechanisms for doing this? It is not only the problems of physical, hydrological and geographical haphazard but it is mechanism, which will make a lot of difference. It is a problem of decision-making, politics, socio-economic matters and cultural advocacy. For this you have to have social instruments, social organization and capital. This requires a lot of commitments. Even if you are prepared and you have a system of early warning mechanisms or whatever but then what about your policy of rehabilitations and reconstruction. What types of building you construct and what are the areas of rehabilitation. Few years ago, we had flood in Kamala. What we did was build buildings to rehabilitate the victims. After living there for some years, the victims returned to their original place.

Is disaster management just a physical exercise?

Disaster management and preparedness is very much a cultural matter. If there is a large earthquake in Nepal, billions of rupees will flow to Nepal. Do we have proper community based mechanisms to handle them? Do we reassign the people in main areas including Nepal Telecommunication, Nepal Electricity Authority and others when some will not attend? In other countries, they have such kinds of preparedness programs. We need to develop a planning operation. Such levels of preparedness are not there. This is a surmountable task. Is there any one thinking in this line? If you start thinking and your mechanism is in place, it is so simple. Disaster risk reduction and preparedness is not costly and it can be very well done even in the country like Nepal.