Global Report on Human Settlements 2007 - PoA-ISS

288
Towards safer and more secure cities
Where inappropriate
development has led
to the accumulation
of disaster risk,
retrofitting can offer
a way of improving
the resilience of a
city’s buildings
In slums …
incentives to
improve the safety
of buildings are
particularly limited
in oversight and demand-side pressures, such as a desire for
modern over indigenous design, even when indigenous
housing has been proven through experience to offer disaster
resistance, or of a desire for cost-cutting, even when this
knowingly leads to the exclusion of disaster
resistant design features.
Professional bodies have begun to develop guidelines
for good practice in designing disaster-resilient critical infrastructure
and this offers a great potential for information
exchange and refinements, in practice, to reduce risk. An
example is work by the Pan-American Health Organization
(PAHO) and the World Health Organization (WHO), which
offers guidelines for promoting disaster mitigation in new
health facilities. Many of the recommendations would apply
to other infrastructure. The goal of these guidelines is to
incorporate risk reduction tools within project cycles, including
pre-investment activities, project design, construction
and maintenance. 30
Future pathways for building resilience in the city
through designing disaster-resilient buildings and infrastructure
include tools for better integrating disaster risk within
project management; efforts to engage with the public to
rethink housing design choices; and support by international
and national agencies, as well as the private sector, for
partnerships with artisan builders to promote good practice
in disaster-proof construction locally.
Aid agencies and construction oversight
Multilateral and bilateral development aid agencies can influence
the location, timing and content of investments in
infrastructure through their stated policy priorities.
However, these agencies often do not have their own guidelines
or engineering standards and procedures with which to
ensure that investments are disaster resistant. Rather, this
service is decentralized and local standards and practices are
Box 12.9 City government support for retrofitting: Tokyo
Metropolitan government
Tokyo is highly exposed to earthquake hazard. Many neighbourhoods in the city are densely
built, with wood being a common building material. Consequently, fire risk is high and has
caused large losses following urban earthquakes. To reduce risk, a Promotional Plan for a
Disaster Resilient City was formulated in 1997. The plan aims to strengthen the resilience of
Tokyo’s buildings through retrofitting and the redesign of urban neighbourhoods. It has three
important components:
• The designation by the Tokyo Metropolitan government of areas for redevelopment into
disaster-resistant zones has made it possible to subsidize retrofitting for fire safety.
Financial assistance is available for the retrofitting of old wooden lease apartments.
• As a basis for planning and retrofitting, the Tokyo Metropolitan Earthquake Disaster
Countermeasure Ordinance and the Tokyo Metropolitan Earthquake Disaster Prevention
Plan call for a diagnosis of the earthquake resistance of public buildings constructed before
1981. This will include fire stations, police stations, schools and hospitals that will need to
function as bases for information, rescue and relief in the event of a major earthquake.
• The Building Earthquake-Resistance Diagnosis System provides a consultation service for
privately owned buildings.
Source: Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Bureau of Urban Development, undated
used. Aid donors rarely become involved in design. This is
especially so in indirect investments such as social investment
funds, where detailed budget decisions and design
criteria are generally set at the national level.
Given the high profile of schools and health service
infrastructure during urban disaster events, and particularly
during earthquakes, the lack of oversight in construction
through social investment funds suggests an area for future
policy consideration. There is also scope for agencies to
provide some momentum for international comparison and
reform of local building standards where these are not appropriate.
A recent review of donor behaviour observes that
publicly constructed infrastructure is exempt from building
codes in many countries. 31 Where codes are followed, they
are often inadequate, particularly in multi-hazard contexts.
Donors usually view the responsibility for construction
standards as resting with governments.
Retrofitting
Where inappropriate development has led to the accumulation
of disaster risk, retrofitting can offer a way of improving
the resilience of a city’s buildings. Opportunities for retrofitting
are often constrained. Despite the small marginal
costs of retrofitting in most instances, where works are
perceived by owners to be unduly disruptive, they are
unlikely to be entered into voluntarily. Similarly, if costs of
retrofitting are considered to be high in relation to perceived
risk, voluntary action will be limited. Where building owners
are not prepared to retrofit buildings, tenants have little
power and are often denied rights to invest in the upgrading
of the property they rent. This includes tenants of private
and public landlords. In slums lacking landownership, incentives
to improve the safety of buildings are particularly
limited.
Retrofitting has been encouraged by insurance companies
by offering incentives such as reduced premiums, or the
stick of only insuring those properties meeting basic
standards of construction. Municipal governments may also
offer advice, technical support and sometimes grants to
encourage private owners to upgrade building safety, and can
integrate retrofitting within urban plans for disaster management.
This is most likely to be undertaken where local
authorities are contemplating urban redevelopment schemes
in which disaster risk reduction has been integrated.
Retrofitting is being tackled on three fronts by the Tokyo
Metropolitan government (see Box 12.9). 32
Whereas the Tokyo Metropolitan government has
taken a spatial planning approach to retrofitting, Quito
(Ecuador) has followed a sectoral path. The National
Polytechnic School in Quito has undertaken an evaluation of
school construction standards in the city. Many design
weaknesses were revealed in this study, which led to a
revised code of standards for schools that have now been
classified as critical facilities. 33
Indigenous buildings