A global review of disaster reduction initiatives - Welcome to the ...

5Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiativesVulnerable building stocksFollowing the earthquakes in Turkey in 1999, earthquake specialists from Istanbul’s Bogazici Universityin Istanbul, summarized the reasons why the building stock of Turkey proved to be so vulnerable:• Rampant code violations that led to disastrous results.• The system was conducive to poor construction.• High inflation meant very limited mortgage and insurance, an impediment to large-scale development,limited industrialization of residential construction.• High rate of industrialization and urbanization lead to a need for inexpensive housing.• No professional qualification of engineers.• Ineffective control/supervision of design and construction.• Corruption.• Regulations with limited enforcement and no accountability.• Ignorance and indifference.• Government was a free insurer of earthquake risk.232services to serve the new population, much lessto attend to how they house themselves.The construction industry world-wide also hasspecial characteristics, many of which militateagainst the achievement of high quality in thebuilt environment. Contributing factorsinclude the high proportion of small localfirms, the one-off or unsupervised nature ofmuch of the work, the risks in relation to therewards, the ability to cut corners by coveringup bad work and the lack of adequate training.Where the prevailing culture is lax or corrupt,local contractors will usually reflect it.Local people can do something to protectthemselves from the possible effects of disastersif simple advice is given and heeded. Theextent to which this advice is provided is oftenlimited and too often the professional communitiesthemselves are not directly involved. Thelessons based on experience, are clear. Engi-Lack of rewards for mitigation measuresA glaring omission in the newly crafted system inTurkey is, of course, the fact that no rewards have beenworked out for mitigation measures. If homeownersdecide to upgrade their buildings, this is currently notrecognised in reduced [insurance] premiums, orincreased benefits. … too much emphasis has beenplaced on the purely technical measures of earthquakeprotection, but this has occurred at the expense ofimproved settlement and spatial planning policies.Source: Gulkan, P., 2000neering studies of disaster damage are regularlyundertaken and constitute a vital element inthe design process. Codes and standards arereviewed in the light of such studies and havegained much from them, particularly whenthey have been undertaken in the early stagesof post-disaster activity.Aside from the common disregard for prevailingconditions of risk, improper design, poorconstruction and inadequate maintenance figureagain and again as major causes of buildingfailure and loss of life. Poor engineering, ineffectivebuilding control by officials and badbuilding practices within construction concernsproduce a grim harvest, long after thosepeople responsible have moved on to otherprojects. Much of the older building stock mayhave been constructed before the adoption ofmodern construction standards, but thereshould be no excuse for the failure of modernbuildings.Where they exist, national engineering institutionsare committed to maintaining appropriatestandards of professional ethics and competenceamong their members and to disciplinethose who deliberately break professional codesof conduct. By virtue of their national standing,they have contacts at senior levels of governmentand international engineering organizations.They are thus in a strong position to promotethe importance of technical integrity,learning the lessons of disasters, identifying andassessing risks and employing disaster-resistantdesign and construction practices. They arealso in a position to work for a better trainedand more risk-conscious construction industry.