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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

practices, private constructions, especially at the village level tend to ignore thesefeatures. Increased education and dissemination of information is thereforenecessary to keep homeowners and masons alike informed of practices.3.1.1f MonitoringIn the Almora region, ninety-two percent of untrained masons report that there isno monitoring of building and construction practices. In Rudraprayag forty-sevenpercent of masons recall having had their work monitored at some stage. It shouldbe noted that the overall quality of buildings is better in the trained region.However, responses were scattered and do not hold much merit as to who wasactually responsible for the monitoring process and why. In the same token,increased training not only of local masons but of the local community facilitatesparticipation in the monitoring process by means of an enhanced understanding of“best practices” for constructions and thereby better construction overall.3.1.1g Homeowner perceptionsWhen asked the reasoning behind homeowners not opting for earthquake-safefeatures seventy-six percent of trained masons suggest that this is attributed to: 1)poor economic condition (note: a common misconception is that earthquake-safefeatures are highly expensive) and 2) homeowners and community members notbeing provided with adequate information regarding earthquake-safe features andtheir costs. Among untrained masons, nineteen percent suggested lack offinances, thirty percent stated lack of knowledge, and twenty-two percent claimedto have no idea. Twenty-seven percent indicate that there are no reasons at allbehind homeowners not using earthquake-safe features insisting that they do, infact, already use earthquake features.3.1.1h Feedback on trainings from Study Area AAn interesting point to emerge from the study is that generally trained masons aremore familiar with both frame structures and load-bearing structures than untrainedmasons. A further dimension to this observation is discovered when comparing PSIThe Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 47
trained masons in the Study Area A sample to masons trained elsewhere; masonsnot trained by PSI are generally more familiar only with load-bearing structures.This may be attributed to the duration of the training course as those trained byother agencies indicated that training was limited to one-day workshops or threedayworkshops as opposed to the 5-day workshops provided by PSI. Longertraining periods are therefore recommended in order to cover all essential materialthereby developing a wider skill base.Overall the masons rated the workshops as follows: 11% find the workshops to besatisfactory, 47% find the course to be very good, and 11% find the course to beexcellent. 28% percent did not respond.When asked what could be done to improve or enhance the trainings 58% of therespondents were unable to provide any recommendations. Of the remaining 42%the following recommendations were made:1) training period should be longer (this was more prevalent among the DPOtrained mason who participated in a one-three day workshop),2) less technical jargon on behalf of the trainers, language should be madesimple,3) new technologies introduced each year,4) shift localities for trainings5) further training in frame structures.3.1.1i RecommendationsIt is recommended that programmes be directed at informing not only masons butalso homeowners on the benefits of earthquake-safe features. It must be stressedthat the cost involved in incorporating these features is not as expensive ascommonly perceived; in actuality only 5-7% of the overall cost of construction. Thisshould be done in conjunction with disaster awareness meetings timed in advanceof the beginning of the building boom periods in the study region, typically April andThe Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation and Response – A Case Study in Uttarakhand, Northern India 48
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: Reponses for what features masons t
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 and 102: sloped roof 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 1 2.78s
Page 103 and 104: 17. Do homeowners request earthquak
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 ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?