A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India - Geological & Mining ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Roof Rudraprayag PSI AlmoraPSI Other Total % % %use of RCC 0 1 1 2.78 0.00 6 16.673 inches 12 1 13 36.11 50.00 4 11.114 inches 2 1 3 8.33 8.33 13 36.11light roof 5 2 7 19.44 20.83 1 2.78thick roof 1 0 1 2.78 4.17 0 0.003 in - 1 story, 4in - 2 story 3 0 3 8.33 12.50 0 0.00no idea 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 16 44.44Can an earthquake safe house be built with traditional materials and design?Yes No Don't knowRudraprayag PSI 20 4Other 8 2 2Total 28 2 6Percent 77.78 5.56 16.67Almora Yes No Don't knowTotal 25 6 5Percent 69.44 16.67 13.8915. Can already built homes be retrofitted to make them earthquake safe?Yes No Don't knowRudraprayag PSI 20 3Other 7 5Total 27 8 1Percentage 75.00 22.22 2.78Almora Yes No Don't knowTotal 5 30 1Percentage 13.89 83.33 2.7816. Are the houses you build monitored during construction?Yes No No repsonseRudraprayag PSI 13 7 3Other 4 8Total 17 15 4Percentage 47.22 41.67 11.11Almora Yes No No repsonseTotal 2 33 1Percentage 5.56 91.67 2.78The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 95
17. Do homeowners request earthquake safe features?Yes No Sometimes No responseRudraprayag PSI 10 8 6 0Other 6 5 1 0Total 16 13 7 0Percentage 44.44 36.11 19.44 0.00Almora Yes No Sometimes No responseTotal 14 7 5 10Percentage 38.89 19.44 13.89 27.7818. Do you advise homeowners on earthquake safe features?Yes No No responseRudraprayag PSI 24 0 0Other 11 1 0Total 35 1 0Percentage 97.22 2.78 0Almora Yes No SometimesTotal 22 11 3Percentage 61.11 30.56 8.3319. What is the most commonly requested feature?Column Band Light roof RCC Beam Through stone Corner strengthening Steel rod Strong home Rapid constructionRudraprayag PSI 16 13 1 0 1 1 1 0 8 1Other 10 4 1 0 0 1 0 1Total 26 17 2 0 1 1 2 0 9 1Percent 72.22 47.22 5.56 0.00 2.78 2.78 5.56 0.00 25.00 2.78Almora Column Band Light roof RCC Beam Through stone Corner strengthening Steel rod Strong home Rapid constructionTotal 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 32 0Percentage 8.33 0.00 0.00 2.78 5.56 0.00 0.00 2.78 88.89 0.0020. Why do villagers not include earthquake safe features in their homes?Lack of money Lack of knowledgeRudraprayag PSI 19 11Other 10 3Total 29 14Percentage 80.56 38.89Almora Lack of money Lack of knowledge No idea They are used No EQ's in region so no need Hurry to constructTotal 7 11 8 10 1 3Percentage 19.44 30.56 22.22 27.78 2.78 8.33The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 96
Page 1 and 2:
The Role of Non GovernmentalOrganis
Page 3 and 4:
Table of contentsChapter 1 - Introd
Page 5 and 6:
List of figuresFigure 1.1: Study re
Page 7 and 8:
preparedness, and has potential to
Page 9 and 10:
This case study investigates the im
Page 11 and 12:
• What are homeowner perceptions
Page 13 and 14:
Seismic activity in this area is du
Page 15 and 16:
The study comprises two regions: St
Page 17 and 18:
1.4.1 - b Study Area B- Almora dist
Page 19 and 20:
etc. operational). The study involv
Page 21 and 22:
Chapter 2 - Theoretical Orientation
Page 23 and 24:
2.1.2 VulnerabilityVulnerability is
Page 25 and 26:
of a disaster everyone knows how to
Page 27 and 28:
disaster management in the country,
Page 29 and 30:
Despite the apparent increased cons
Page 31 and 32:
2.3.1 Disaster Mitigation and Prepa
Page 33 and 34:
save lives. This event marked a pri
Page 35 and 36:
Systems technologies and education
Page 37 and 38:
As suggested previously, there is a
Page 39 and 40:
on the main agenda (Benson et al, 2
Page 41 and 42:
Frame structureFramed structures ha
Page 43 and 44:
The curriculum of the PSI workshops
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 2.2a: Community based disast
Page 47 and 48:
district irrespective of the fact t
Page 49 and 50:
etrofitting, monitoring and homeown
Page 51 and 52: structures as an alarming forty-fiv
Page 53 and 54: Reponses for what features masons t
Page 55 and 56: trained masons in the Study Area A
Page 57 and 58: ecommended that a similar study be
Page 59 and 60: 3.1.2b Awareness and Dissemination
Page 61 and 62: It is interesting to note that when
Page 63 and 64: Community based disaster preparedne
Page 65 and 66: 3.1.3 - Section 3 Housing Impact As
Page 67 and 68: Load-bearing1.single steel rod in e
Page 69 and 70: The overall proportion of newly bui
Page 71 and 72: etween stirrups of 6-12 inches. Alt
Page 73 and 74: Table 3.7: Percentage of safe house
Page 75 and 76: 3.2 DiscussionThe discussion segmen
Page 77 and 78: In Study Area A the number of earth
Page 79 and 80: 2) mitigation measures were taken i
Page 81 and 82: 3.3 ConclusionsIn conclusion, the s
Page 83 and 84: ReferencesAlexander, D., 1997. The
Page 85 and 86: Guptasarma, D. 1996. Is the Seismic
Page 87 and 88: Telford, J. and Cosgrave, J., 2007.
Page 89 and 90: Annex I - Earthquake safe featuresT
Page 91 and 92: The Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitiga
Page 97 and 98: Annex 2 - Mason Interview ResultsSt
Page 99 and 100: 11. How to make such a course more
Page 101: sloped roof 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 1 2.78s
Page 105 and 106: light roof 1 0 1 2.78 0 0.00RCC 1 3
Page 107 and 108: 6. How long have you lived in the v
Page 109 and 110: 16. Do you have an emergency commun
Page 111 and 112: 26. What activities related to the
Page 113 and 114: 36. Would you prefer traditional ma
Page 115 and 116: Appendix IV - Breakdown of earthqua
Page 117: Appendix IV - Breakdown of earthqua
show all

A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India - Geological & Mining ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?