Smart Infrastructure
By James Cho
|
On 26 December 2004, a tsunami struck southern Asia, causing one of the worst disasters the world had ever seen. With each passing day, the horror became more unfathomable as the death toll eventually reached over 200,000. However, the nightmare had just begun. The tsunami destroyed livelihoods and displaced millions of people from their homes, leaving them vulnerable to health risks that lay in the dark shadows of the wreckage and brackish water that covered what was once dry land.
In the months following, observers gave a number of answers about how the disaster could, would and should have been prevented. In part, this discussion helped the world gain some semblance of control over the incomprehensible loss of life and provided some security in feeling that the devastation and deaths could have been easily averted through the hands of man and the tools of technology.
However, the tsunami further highlighted the vulnerability of developing countries to natural disasters. While no man-made force can stop natural disasters, their effects are preventable through preparedness and well-planned development.
The first step towards this objective came at the International Meeting to Review the Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States in Port Louis, Mauritius. Its Secretary-General, Anwarul Chowdhury, in his closing statement called for a road map for implementation of the Mauritius Declaration. Drafted by conference delegates, the Declaration focuses on sustainable development and includes a measure for disaster preparedness.
The second step came a few weeks later at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction, from 18 to 22 January in Kobe, Japan, where Margaret Arnold of the World Bank’s Hazard Management Unit pointed to the need for better building codes and design of coastal structures.
These two steps emphasize the important role infrastructure plays in sustainable development. While it is part of the push for sustainable development, the construction of infrastructure that examines both the daily and emergency needs of a community is not always implemented.
One of the distinctions between how developed and developing States respond to and recover from disasters is in the availability of vital and sound infrastructure, which plays a large role in disaster management and can mean the difference between the deaths of several dozens and hundreds to thousands of people. The push for sustainable development may help create infrastructure, but regulation of building standards that govern their day-to-day use will also help to build stronger structures.
Poorly designed infrastructure could increase rather than mitigate potential hazards, and poorly planned economic development could turn a recurring natural phenomenon into a human economic disaster, said Ms. Arnold. “Allowing dense populations on flood plains or permit-ting poor building codes in earthquake zones is as likely as a natural event to cause casualties and losses.”
Japan and the United States stand as examples of how regulatory measures can affect the safety of citizens. Both Kobe and Los Angeles are areas that are highly susceptible to earthquakes. In the recorded past, the deaths of denizens reached levels similar to developing countries. Over time, both areas implemented and modified their building codes to make them more resilient to earthquakes. Although the loss of life in the 1995 Kobe earthquake reached 5,000, a report by EQE International showed that many of the structures that met the current building standards withstood the force of the quake.
“A road map for the implementation of the Mauritius Strategy would serve as an overarching guideline. It would help in the coordination of the activities of different stakeholders. It would give us a basis for monitoring and review. It would help in indicating the progress achieved or the lack of progress.”
—Anwarul K. Chowdhury
Secretary-General of the Mauritius Conference |
|
In addition to the mitigation of hazards and risk reduction, infrastructure provides a safety net that helps to protect the investment made in human and physical capital. While no infrastructure would have been able to withstand the direct force of the tsunami, well-planned and well-constructed public infrastructure helped with the sheltering and distribution of resources to people affected by the disaster. The construction of public buildings, such as schools, government centres and other public facilities, is one of the valuable tools needed for disaster management. These buildings can provide a number of services outside their intended use, and during times of emergency can be used as a staging area, alternate health-care sites and for temporary or permanent shelters. After an earthquake damaged a number of homes in Kobe, some that were in compliance with building codes were still usable for sheltering displaced citizens.
Economic and human resources may pose barriers to measures of preparedness and mitigation. The World Bank cites Samoa as a shining example of a nation that benefited from the inclusion of hazard-mitigation measures. Following a 2004 cyclone, Samoa reported no deaths and World Bank officials said that the $30-million damage sustained could have been five to eight times worse if preparedness and hazard-reduction measures had not been implemented. Cuba has also been effective in preparing its infrastructure and citizens to respond to cyclones that tear through the country annually.
As reconstruction in southern Asian countries has commenced, they are at a crucial point in their development. The rush has begun to rebuild the region so that people can return to their daily lives. While there is a need for expediency to return people to more permanent shelters and restore the economy, it is also a moment to pause and examine what role infrastructure will play in disaster management and implement needed hazard-reduction standards. Development looks to the future, but it is also important that it is durable enough to last at least until its use has come and gone. |
| For more information on natural disasters and preparedness see UN Chronicle issues 4, 1999 and 4, 2000. |
|
| James Cho is a Preparedness Specialist for the New York City Office of Emergency Management. This article represents the opinion of the author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of OEM or of the City of New York. |
Go Back Top
|
|
Print