Its tangible results are preparation of a ‘National Action Plan’ with ‘Disaster Preparedness Action Plan Matrix’ and ‘Disaster Response Action Plan Matrix,’ constitution of Ward Level Disaster Management Committees in the Kathmandu valley, implementation of National Building Code (in Kathmandu and Lalitpur), earthquake monitoring and information dissemination by Department of Mining and Geology from the 17 stations distributed all over the country including recent establishment of Earthquake Emergency Shelter within the premises of the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Despite all these efforts, cities and societies in Nepal are not safe against earthquakes. Human and economic losses due to earthquake disaster are on the rise. In fact, population movements are changing the context of earthquake risk and development processes have modified natural hazard and calamities. Nature provides equal opportunity for all but the urban development process, responsible for unequal distribution of resources and socioeconomic disparity, is causing uneven vulnerability. Numerous geophysical processes – location of Nepal between the active Tibetan and Indian tectonic plates, active fault lines passing through various cities of Nepal, soft soil and events of frequent earthquake in the past – are the major reasons behind earthquake hazard in Nepal. Recent scientific study on movement of tectonic plates and history of the past earthquake has revealed that the next great earthquake will hit the middle (and southern part of the valley) of Nepal.
Numerous activities associated with rapid urbanization and haphazard growth of cities and densification of human settlements, responsible for increasing seismic risk, are yet to be seriously addressed. For instance, the changes in land use from residential to commercial and densification (from 3-4 storey to 8-9 storey high structure) in the historic core of the Kathmandu valley and urban sprawl of ‘low rise low density’ housing development in the peripheral agricultural land without provision of basic amenities and emergency facilities has been taking place on ad-hoc basis in the absence of a comprehensive master plan and development control.
Moreover, vertical division of the traditional building stocks and then their haphazard renovation and reconstruction has further weakened the old houses. Newly expanded settlements are often characterized by many building structures built by inappropriate and informal methods, road layout of inadequate width and insufficient spaces for emergency vehicle movement, lack of open spaces and social amenities. Though modern materials such as cement, concrete and iron are used, lack of quality control on construction work and building materials and absence of supervision by qualified professionals has reduced the seismic resistance of new construction. Numerous private schools, colleges and private nursing homes are running their activities in ordinary residential buildings, built by informal process. Recent high rise apartments by private sector are also not desirable from earthquake safety point of view.
Concentration of business activities in urban centres (40,000-45,000 people per sq km in Kathmandu) has not only exposed large population under the seismic risk but it will also cause rescue and relief operation extremely difficult in case of emergency. Gap between rich and poor is increasing as is the slums and squatter settlements. Poor and economically disadvantaged people living in hazardous sites such as along the riverbanks and sloped areas have low affordability level, less education and lack of funds to recover from the disaster.
The capacity to deal with earthquake disaster and level of preparedness at city and individual levels is inadequate. There is no proportionate increase in emergency facilities compared to urbanization rate. Fire fighting offices are located in the dense area, lack trained staffs and necessary equipment and under budgeted, even not enough to keep all vehicles in running condition. Both the government hospitals and private nursing homes mostly located in the dense area have neither emergency response plan nor can they provide any effective services during natural calamity due to the limited number of beds, medical staffs and the medicine stocks needed for mass treatment. Even if these conditions are met, the service delivery will not be possible due to disruption in electricity, water supply and communication lines besides difficulties in gathering trained staffs in the hospital, as best illustrated by the great Hansen Earthquake in Kobe, Japan in 1995.
Earthquake risk reduction task is scattered among different ministries and their departments and none of them have a disaster management unit within their organizations. So, no funds are allocated for mitigation and preparedness works. National Calamity (Relief) Act 1982 and Special Disaster Unit within the Ministry of Home Affairs is the only existing legal and institutional framework, which basically performs rescue and relief operation during natural calamities. Even the Municipality and Village Development Committee, the lowest grass root political and administrative unit has to depend either on Chief District Officer or District Development Committee in case of disaster. The building bylaws applicable for only new construction are ineffective to control vertical division of old houses, haphazard renovation of houses and occupancy change in the building.
Implementation of building code is also not effective. Earthquake mitigation components are not integrated in the ongoing land development and housing construction implemented by both public and private sectors. The municipalities have poor managerial, technical and financial capabilities. Few initiatives aiming at reducing social and economic vulnerabilities are not only poorly funded but also limited in the formal sector of economy, and bypass the poor and most vulnerable sections of society. Urban specialists do not see disasters and disaster prevention as being within their remit.
Since the geophysical processes of natural hazard cannot be changed, the only practical way is to build cities and societies confirming with this reality. Nepal is yet to realize this fundamental fact. Celebration of Earthquake Safety Day using posters and pamphlets, organizing rallies and procession and exhibition alone do not address the above mentioned root causes of the earthquake risk. In fact, the general people have taken such initiative as mere celebration rather than the issues of death and life. The present ‘responsive’ disaster management approach should be changed into ‘preventive and preparedness’ type through integrating mitigation components into development works at different levels.
A central level Disaster Management institution backed up by new legislation to formulate earthquake mitigation technique, emergency response plan and post reconstruction programs by coordinating various concerned agencies, on one hand, and enhancement of community’s preparedness by retrofitting the existing buildings, preparing rescue and response plan, educating and training those involved in building industry together with bringing public awareness at local ward level, on the other hand, is essential. Above all, sincere commitment and timely act is essential to reduce seismic risk in Nepal. Then and only then, the celebration of the Earthquake Safety Day will be meaningful.
Related story
Opposition launching protest on shaky ground-PM
