CHAPTER VI

EARTHQUAKE DISASTER MANAGEMENT:

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF
INDIA AND THE USA
EARTHQUAKE DISASTER MANAGEMENT:
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INDIA AND THE USA
The USA is a politically democratic set up and has a capital mode of
approach with industrially and technologically advanced country. Basically
heterogeneous community, comprising many social groups with divergent values and
beliefs, influence of immigration in different languages, family patterns and life styles,
includes material attitude, individual liberty and freedom. In turn, it faces with many
inherent problems such as poverty in urban areas, unemployment, economic
recession, crime, etc.
India is one of the largest democratic set up and heavily populated country in
the World but has predominantly agricultural based economy. India also has
heterogeneous community with different languages, cultures and various lifestyles,
rooted with fatalistic attitude. India is also facing various problems including poverty,
unemployment, illiteracy, caste system and traditional working class set up. However,
it has a pluralistic government, free press and spirit of debate which makes national
and local government responsive to the needs of disaster victims.
There are 39 states, in the USA, with combined population of about 70
million, where, people are potential target for earthquakes. The threat is not
combined with one particular earthquake prone areas but also can cause damages
even hundreds and thousand miles away. As far as earthquake management is
concerned, except California all other states are way behind. Because of the
frequency of earthquake disasters and damages, economic development, availability
of resources, revenues from taxes and political power in decision making, all these
factors are influencing California's earthquake management activities.
A wide range of natural disaster occur in India. Nearly 13 states are facing the
earthquakes hazard risk. However, before the Latur earthquake it was believed that
only the Northern and North-Eastern states are more prone to earthquake risk. But
that assumption was totally shattered after the Peninsular earthquake. Though, all the
213
states are similar with economic development in India, except Maharashtra slightly
better than other states. Nevertheless, in Maharashtra, particularly Marathwada
region (Latur) is relatively backward area with under developed irrigation facilitates.
Inefficient, inadequate and obsolete communication system, concentrated with lower
literacy masses and predominantly rural and agricultural base of population are the
main characteristics.
Facts
California is known for many hidden faults and recurrence of earthquakes so
frequently but surprisingly Californian's are inadequately prepared themselves to
tackle them. The Northridge, in California earthquake was an unexpected or
unanticipated one. Neitlier scientists nor people were expected such a magnitude of
earthquake disaster. Specifically surprise to the scientists because of its "shallow"
nature. The Northridge earthquake exposed the weakness of scientists inability in
monitoring, forecasting and disseminating reliable information about earthquake
disaster occurrence in advance. In fact, it was assumed that the US scientists are well
advanced in scientifically and technologically with extensive research on earthquake
prediction and monitoring activities, but the Northridge earthquake demonstrated
that scientists were unable to detect earthquake disaster before hand.
Similarly in India, when the Latur earthquake struck, it was absolutely
shocking and utter surprise to scientists as well as general people. Generally, the
peninsular area was considered a "paradigm of stable", that notion was totally called
off after the Latur earthquake disaster. Even though historically many earthquakes
occurred in the past, but never given serious thought about the earthquake activity in
this region by the scientist. This was clearly demonstrated by the Latur earthquake
disaster. Because of the region was marked in the seismic zone map as a most stable
zone I, but the Latur earthquake has demonstrated more than zone IV level intensity.
This has disproved the authensity of seismic zone categorization in India. The Latur
earthquake exposed two important points, one is scientists' poor seismic research
activities and utilization of inefficient obsolete earthquake monitoring equipment,
214
two, clearly indicates India's unpreparedness situation against the earthquake
disaster.
The Northridge and Latur areas were never considered serially about
earthquake risk by the people as well as Scientist . Otherwise, unexpected and
unnecessary losses could have reduced drastically. This has clearly explicit both
countries' unpreparedness against earthquake risk respectively.
Death and Damages
The death tool was relatively high compared to the number of people injured
in India. One contributing factor was the time of the earthquake. The early morning
time caught people asleep after an exhausting week of religious celebrations. The
young and old could not easily escape from their homes before the heavy stone walls
collapsed on them. If it had happened in a day time, 80 percent of people would have
gone for agricultural activities, thereby reducing the loss of life, injuries and other
destruction.
Under the different circumstance in the U.S.A, a night time earthquake mean
fewer death. In the recent Northridge earthquake disaster, death and injuries would
have been much worse had it struck at the early hours of morning because most of
the people would have been out for job and schooling hours. Since the earthquake
occurred in early morning hours the death rate was too meager and only caused
severe damage to roads and highway bridges.
The Latur earthquake killed nearly 9400 people purely because of the soil
condition, weak foundation and poor quality of construction and design which
increased the death tool. While in the US death toll is nearly 60 only but economic
damages are higher. The Northridge earthquake caused less of life, because of a
single factor that most of buildings are constructed according to building codes and
designed to resist earthquake severity. Therefore, to some extend the USA ,
particularly in California , could reduced the death rate but increasing damage costs.
However, in comparison with national GNP loss it is only meager percentage. In
215
India, the number of deaths are so high and also further weaken the development
economy ofthe country.
Impact
Any society economically developed has a built-in strength to manage disaster
on its own to some extent. The loss of property and human lives due to deaths are
inversely proportional to the level of development, which can be seen from the study.
In fact the level of economic development has a direct bearing on the extent of
damage and losses during disasters.
Reducing the impact of earthquake, particularly lives and property becomes
.highly critical task. It is based on the countries population set up, resources
availability, co-ordination among people and agencies, awareness and preparedness
against earthquake construction design and material used in buildings, poverty and
existing other compelling immediate problems all directly influence the disaster
management and it's impact. Unless we check the population, and find remedy to the
existing problem, we may not attain any fruitful result in reducing the impact
However, in both countries, earthquake disaster impact greatly varies. In the USA
more impact takes place on economy and other infrastructure facilities where as in
India the direct impact is on people's life and livelihood.
Prediction
Predicting earthquake is, however, still virtually impossible. Particularly,
given the complexity of the fault system, predicting 'where and when' the next
earthquake will strike and with what intensity is highly crucial and difficult task at
present. The wreaked havoc on Northridge and Latur earthquake was a deadly
reminder, which raised doubt about seismologist knowledge and understanding about
the titanic forces residing within the earth's crust and its stress meganism.
In fact, the issue is not whether seismologists can provide adequate
forewarning of an imminent earthquake but the daunting task is to ensure that when
216
earthquake occurs built environment do not collapse and crush or kill the people or
destroy property is important
As for as Scientists' prediction and forewarning concern both countries are
facing similar type of problem , irrespective of their economic development
Therefore, India and USA, still much need to learn and to improve the existing
earthquake monitoring and prediction methods.
Perception and Preparedness
In the USA, people living in seismically more prone regions frequently facing
damaging earthquakes (e.g. California) generally believe that earthquake can occur in
their life time and have severe impact on their community. Similarly people living in
areas of low seismic activity but high chance of loss (i.e., the Central united States)
are surprisingly aware that earthquakes may disrupt their community some times in
the near future. However, people are typically reluctant to take preventive measures
against the earthquake risk which they are facing. Even, community decision makers
although aware about earthquake threat to their communities, but not willing to take
any precautionary steps to reduce earthquake risk.
People perception widely differ from each country. In the US, majority of the
Americans believe that government should protect citizens from internal and external
threats. They also believe that earthquake disaster can be reduced or controlled to
same extent but people still not take adeq\-late precaution measures which was
clearly indicated in the Northridge earthquake's damage. People expect more from
the local or state government whereas the federal government suggests that people
should take precaution measures against earthquake hazard. Federal government also
provides many incentives or loans, and tax reduction measures to induce people to
take precaution activities. However, people are not interested to take any initiative
because of the personal cost involved in it.
In the case of India, generally, the fatalistic attitude and perception about the
disaster particularly the belief that disasters are way of life and this attitude, reduce
217
the precaution action against earthquake disaster. Nevertheless, one cannot blames
for this because of econorruc conditions or below poverty level, uneducated,
unemployment, more traditional way of approach, caste system, life styles and
inadequate dissemination of information, paucity of resources availability and other
compelling priorities all these which restrict the awareness among people and make
them unable to participate in earthquake preparedness activities. In fact they are
expecting everything from government. But the government neither takes any
initiative to educate or train them nor properly inform them about the earthquake
risks nor teach them how to take care against earthquake disaster in advance. The
government is also not providing any sort of financial assistance to people. So that
they can take precaution action before hand.
It was observed from Latur earthquake that most of the people expressed
their helpless during the earthquake disaster period only, after that neither
government nor the people are concerned about the consequences. People also
considers that earthquake disaster becomes a part of their life. Further government
also not takes any lessons from it. It is important that the lessons learned from the
Latur earthquake disaster must be incorporated into the policy and planning
activities. So that future earthquake damages can be reduced drastically.
Generally there is no pamphlets or other relevant materials available that
could be used to enhance the public understanding out, what constitutes a building
safety against earthquake hazard?, how to identify series safety situation or how to
mitigate them?. Though, public concern of earthquake hazards may be increased
because of personal experience, education and information to the public and officials,
but it is not necessarily increase public response action against earthquake .
Medical Facilities
Immediately after the Latur earthquake, shortage of medical facilities
including doctors and medicines was witnessed. The situation changed after 48 hours,
when sufficient amount of drugs and medical teams carried out a proper epidemic
surveillance round the clock. Absolutely no epidemic breakdown was observed and
218
also better sanitation facilities was provided by the Government alongwith the
cooperation of other NGO's. In the case of Northridge earthquake which clearly
exposed the vulnerability of hospital or medical facilities. Many hospital could not
provide medical facilities because of shortage of power packing system and water
supply and about 18 hospital normal function was totally collapsed. Failure of the
medical communication was another problem which was identified from the relief and
rehabilitation point of view .
In both countries there is a need to develop an efficient medical system that
need to be provided to the victims as early as possible, in case of emergency. A better
back up system is much preferable in this regard.
Water Facilities
Generally shortage of water is endemic in Maharashtra because of its drought
condition. The Latur earthquake aggravated the water problem, furthermore, because
of damage of many water tankers and installations. That created shortage of water
availability immediately after Latur earthquake. But it was rectified within few days
by distribution of water by tanker and temporary boreholes.
Similarly Northridge earthquake also exposed the vulnerability inherent with
water system. The shortage of water occurred mainly because of the water pipelines
leaks and many fires brought by drifting out water from tankers and swimming pools.
This has led the water provision for two weeks in many areas disrupted. Even
scarcity or unavailability of water was observed in many hospitals and they were
unable to function for many weeks continuously.
The role of private sector and NGOs
The role of private sectors in planning and responding for earthquake disaster
is growing and in fact, the private sectors play a pivotal role in the USA. Particularly
land developers, contractors, real estate bankers and finance sectors all having strong
concern about the influence over the issues in earthquake mitigation measures,
construction and design methods and land use management activities.
219
Similarly, in India, the role of individual philanthropic organizations, NGOs,
corporate sectors and other developmental agencies are playing an important part in
earthquake disaster management activities. Specifically, relief, rescue, rehabilitation
and reconstruction process. As for the long term measures and activities, they mostly
lie with the governmental agencies only. One important drawback is that they are
inadequately incorporated into policy making and planning process. Nevertheless
NGOs and corporate sectors are being more resourceful and efficient, properly
utilizing their services into earthquake disaster management activities which is
appreciable.
Relief and Reconstruction
Delay in relief material distribution and lack of coordination activities among
the Government agencies and NGO's were found in India because of Indian
government red-tapism mechanism which delayed the local NGO's and multinational
agencies involvement in relief and rescue activities immediately after the earthquake
in India. The government also determined to take care of Latur earthquake relief
and rescue operation by its own, because of experiences gained from various natural
disasters. Therefore the government of India announced that it was not soliciting the
international community for immediate assistance. As the situation unfolded the
confidence proved well found.
Another important aspect was, no proper assessment was done immediately
after the disaster, about the need, place, and what type of relief material is required.
This led to heap of relief, materials poured in the earthquake affected place from all
over the country and which was more than required. The relief materials particularly
medicines were found outdated and some materials were not suited for the cultural
lifestyles of the people. Apart from that some individuals and philanthropic
organizations were providing relief material, which was indeed an effective one.
Even though relief and rescue plans are well scripted in the USA, but m
reality the Northridge earthquake exposed much weakness or drawbacks. Though the
government arranged shelters in concrete buildings but most of the people directly
220
affected by the Northridge earthquake were unwilling to stay in concrete shelters and
similar case was also observed in Latur earthquake.
People rather wanted to stay in open places and parks. This brought more
sanitation problem among with illness to the people. The government never
experienced such a new situation. Therefore for arranging a proper shelter took more
than five days and people had to stay without any proper shelter, with inadequate
sanitation and water facilities. This has raised many doubts about the notion of 'well
prepared nation' against earthquake disaster.
Similarly, immediately after the Latur earthquake, the Maharashtra
Government has arranged shelter for the affected people on many open places. It was
observed though many people were unwilling to stay in the shelter. But they prepared
to stay in open places. Because of fear about another earthquake.
The Latur earthquake also demonstrated the perverse relief policy, which as
reflected in paucity of disaster fund and improper coordination activities among the
government and NGO.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation Measures are neither being implemented on a national scale nor
proceeded with uniformly in the U.S.A. Because certain values and belief in
American society do not support centralized mitigation efforts. It is deeply rooted in
culture the free use of property and freedom of action and right of the private citizen.
There is also considerable mistrust among many segments of population about federal
and state government intervention in both private and local community life.
Therefore, a general lack of earthquake mitigation in many seismically prone
region in many states in U.S.A. except California. Because of frequent occurrence of
earthquake they are practising various mitigation measures. Generally many
communities are not giving more importance for mitigation measures. Further, the
authorities for earthquake disaster mitigation activities are dispersed among many
221
agencies and several level of government. The expertise also scatter among many
other organizations.
Unfortunately in India, an effective earthquake mitigation measures is yet to
be established. The existing measures are lacking with many critical aspects. India has
various levels of authorities who are responsible for mitigation activities but it is not
properly systematized and they don't have the coordination among themselves. The
main problem faced for the effective implementation of mitigation measures includes
the funding, individual knowledge and capacity, education and awareness of the
consequences and measures against earthquake. The earthquake mitigation measures
responsibilities mostly lies with the governmental authorities only. Specifically the
central government. Individuals or communities are reluctant to take precaution
action of their own. Indeed they are expecting the government should take care of
them against earthquake disaster. This same attitude and perception were observed in
the USA also.
Land use Management
Such as zoning, mapping and building codes are established well, but these
were not adopted and implemented seriously all over the USA, except California
State. Even in California the problem lies with implementation of such measures.
Further each state having a separate legal procedure of implementation. There is no
uniform implementation process, to initiate any mitigation policy or planning measure
comes under the particular state responsibility and implementation of such measure is
done by local government:
In India the concept of mitigation, prevention, preparedness, adaptation of
zoning and designing are never incorporated into planning measures particularly, the
zoning map need to be re-evaluate. The recent Latur earthquake clearly indicated the
weakness in classification of zones. All the states in India are following similar or
uniform zoning method. Further, zoning are based on judgement for which the
historical data is inadequate. Therefore, it is not precise enough to be legally
enforceable. However both countries are facing similar problems in land use
222
management approach, such as poor quality of construction and alongwith paucity of
funding and staffing to implement the earthquake mitigation measures.
The house collapsed because of the poor quality construction, Improper
design and code application. Even most earthquake prone areas in the USA have still
not properly implemented the building code. Even many localities in California many
poor quality of structures still exists. However, the existing structure having no legal
upgrade system, because different kinds of structures and frequency of waves are
creating litigation problem.
Northridge earthquake indicates that more damages are caused by inadequate
detailing of connections particularly on non-structural elements. The damage to non-
structural elements and building contents are more severe than the damage to
structural element. It should be noted that merely designing to code does not always
safeguard against excessive damage in a severe earthquake. Decision makers often do
not see the management of natural hazard as a priority. Another typical problem is
insufficient inspection of initial installations and enforcement of standards,
eventhough when building. and zoning requirements have been enacted.
In the case of India, even though quite advanced in seismic engineering but
utilizing this knowledge is however very difficult. Because India is facing with a very
large stock of wlnerable buildings and competing priorities with scarcity of
resources. The Latur earthquake exposed the drawback of traditional buildings, with
poor quality of building design, construction, and used low grade material which are
not suited for earthquake hazards. Along with the absence of building codes,
population density and growth, allied to enhanced more deaths. The enforcement of
any code or designing demand enormous amount of resources, staffing and
inspection. The quality of construction can be improved in both countries through
information dissemination, education and training to people and innovation of
cheaper modem technological methods in building construction activities.
223
Strengthening
Strengthening of unreinforced masonry buildings in order to make the
earthquake prone area safer is most important. The Northridge earthquake confirmed
that the need for strengthening URM buildings to enhance its capacity against the
future earthquake disaster in the USA. However, it demands for huge amount of
financial requirement and is likely to result in significant increase of rent. Performance
of retrofitting buildings for the size of earthquake is acceptable, still remains an open
question. It was noticed that many owners of URM are unaware of the distinction
between life safety risk and damage control of retrofitting. Indeed many owners have
not been informed the limitation of strengthening ofURM in the USA.
In the case of India, , no such programme was initiated yet. In India more
than 80 percent of houses are vulnerable to one or other disasters but because of
people poor economic contain or precarious situation in life they are unable to afford
huge money on strengthening their buildings or house to natural disasters. The
government also neither initiates any law regarding strengthening vulnerable buildings
nor evolves any funding mechanism or provides loans to people to strengthen their
houses against earthquake risk.
Insurance
Insurance is an another important mitigation measure, though it may not
reduce the lives or damages totally, but indirectly it helps to improve to earthquake
management. In the U.S.A insurance approach is generally done by the private
sectors only. They are also sometime insolvent when the earthquake damage is more
than anticipated. Many insurance industries fear that a severe earthquake disaster
could lead many insurance firms to limit their future coverage. Many organization
authorities and scholars feel that federal government should involve in earthquake
insurance. However, the earthquake management industry has developed to some
extent well only in California state.
224
In the case of India, insurance industry is yet to develop. Nevertheless,
because of the cost involvement and poor background of people, it is really doubtful
that to which extent earthquake insurance measure can be utilised. Despite that it
cannot be the vehicle to impel the enactment and enforcement of hazard mitigation
measures.
Education and Training
In both countries, education and training for people and concern officer is not
established properly. Therefore, education about earthquake nature, and its
consequences need to be informed. Specifically teaching them about how to take
care of earthquake risk is required in both of the countries. This require more
resources, public participation and involvement, also government willingness and
training which could reduce the impact of future earthquake.
Media
The media plays a key role in increasing public awareness of the threat and in
shaping preparedness for a future earthquake. In fact news media often do not
coincide with those of earthquake planners. In the Latur earthquake, media coverage
exaggerated early death figures and created rumor and panic among people but the
rumor had no truth.
Though in the US, multi channels of T.V. and radio, are available but for
disseminating earthquake related information no particular channel is responsible.
Further because of different culture, languages and values, it is difficult to
disseminate information properly and accurately. Also no informal channels works.
Where as in India, although the information dissemination is not yet developed well
but there are plenty of way it can be enhanced. One of the best way would be
informal channels.
225
Funding
Many sources are providing funding and assistance to rehabilitation process in
India, particularly, NGO's (India) and corporate sectors. Even central government is
also providing financial support to state for its rehabilitation and reconstruction
activities. There are many funding mechanism available in India such as Disaster
Relief Fund. However it is only a small amount. In Latur earthquake, only 20 crore
Rupees was provided for relief activities but there was a need of 1 000 crores rupees
for reconstruction activities. However, constitution of funding and reconstruction
activities by the NGO's are only in short term and major portion of the long-term
responsibility to earthquake disaster management rests with government only.
Specifically, the nodal agency of natural disasters, Agricultural ministry takes
reconstruction activities.
In the case of USA, though many agencies are responsible for relief and
rehabilitation, particularly FEMA plays an important role. In the Northridge
earthquake FEMA provided 500 $ million for long term guarantees to help
California. Apart from t ~ t share 1 0 percent of rehabilitation cost. Infact relief and
rehabilitation eligibility is determined by FEMA and the program authorized by the
state.
In Both countries pattern of authorities for disaster management is similar,
and plan for reconstruction activities emphasis more on economic recovery of the
affected community. However, mental health aspect of rehabilitation is forgotten
totally and therefore there is need for better planning.
Policy Measures
No separate comprehensive earthquake management policy and planning
measures are available in India. Most of the earthquake related activities are done by
adhoc basis. Further no separate earthquake management agency is established but
formulation of such an agency in India, would be a welcome event. Whereas in the
case of USA a well written and established earthquake management policies and
226
plans are available. However, no national level earthquake policy and planning is
available. Each state prepared a separate policy of their own. This is because each
state differs in by the ethnic population, development activities, resources availability,
the capacity to implement and enforce the law, political support, priority and the cost
involvement. Further inherent with many other problems the USA is unable to
implement earthquake policy measures effectively .Also no such policy exclusively
dealing with special groups, such as, old people, children and ~ i k people ts
.._ .. ~ ~ ~
available. Further evaluation ofthe existing relief policy method is advisable.
India is also handicapped with policy measure specifically with preparedness,
relief and resource rehabilitation coordination among NGO's and other organization,
and funding mechanisms.
As such, in the USA policies for earthquake already existed but adoption and
implementation is the main problem in contrast with India no policy or any
comprehensive plans are formulated properly. In addition , the psychological
consequence of earthquake disaster victims are forgotten to some extent in both
countries.
Responsibility
The governmental system is highly decentralized in both countries. The Jaws,
tradition, and expectations dictate the disaster planning primarily be a local
community in the U.S. In the similar set up can be seen in India also. As far as the
federal function concern, both countries function as an advisor role and provide
financial support to the states which are affected by the earthquake or related
activities. If the state requires more assistance then the federal government would
assess the situation and evaluate the need before providing additional help. If its
beyond the control of states then federal government directly involve the disaster
management activities.
227
If necessary, the damages to lives or economic loss is more severe then the
President of the USA will declare disasters affected area. In India Prime Minister
announce the disaster declaration of the affected area.
Nevertheless, the array of government jurisdiction within the USA leads to
maJor overlaps as well as conflict responsibilities, which poses challenge for
integrated development of disaster management activities.
Because of several agencies and such decentralized political set up resulted in
lack of standardization in earthquake disaster planning and response in the USA..
Despite of responsibilities lies with multi level, most of the agencies and
organizations are working under three levels of government setup such as Federal,
State and local level. Nevertheless there is no single organization exclusively
responsible for national level earthquake disaster management. However all the
related organization and agencies are working under three level of governmental
setup, such as Federal, State and local level. There is no single organization which is
responsible for national level earthquake management in the USA
In both countries, earthquake disaster management activities namely,
preparedness before disaster occurrence, during emergency and post disaster
rehabilitation activities are rests with state and local government only. The Federal
government mainly provide support to state and local government action and involve
with prediction and warning and research activities.
However, in India also similar type of decentralized system is existing. The
functions of disaster management is also very much similar. One exception would be
the variety of organizationinvolved in each state in the USA under specific agencies.
In India there is no such responsible earthquake disaster management agency existing
and only the Agricultural Ministry function as a nodal agency for all type of disaster
mitigation activities and coordinating relief and rehabilitation measures.
228