RAPPORTEUR’S REPORT
CONTENTS
Acronyms 3 Background 4 Executive Summary 4 Opening Ceremony 6
Session 1: The Jamaican Context 7
1.1 Recent Research Findings on faults in Jamaica 1.2 1907
Earthquake Scenario in 2007 1.3 Legal Framework to Disaster Risk
Reduction 1.4 Rapid Assessment of Selected Critical Facilities 1.5
National Earthquake Simulation Exercise 1.6 Tsunami and Other
Coastal Hazards Session 2: Best Practices and Lessons Learnt 11 2.1
Lessons from the Great East Japan and Hanshin Earthquakes 2.2
Lessons from the Haitian Earthquake 2.3 Implementation of National
Seismic Risk Plans, Best Practices & Lessons Learnt 2.4
Earthquake Experiences from Mexico 2.5 National Civil protection
System: ONEMI Evolution Session 3: Resilience and Critical
Infrastructure 16 3.1 Earthquakes and Critical Infrastructure 3.2
The Role of the Private Sector and the Experience of Digicel in the
Haiti Earthquake 3.3 Safe Hospitals Study 3.4 Role of BCP and
International Standards 3.5 Status of the Jamaican Building Code
3.6 Building Codes and Other Regulations Session 4: Working Groups:
21 Final Plenary 21 Closing Ceremony 26 Key Points 28 Immediate
Next Steps 28 Appendices
3
ACRONYMS
CENAPRED Centro Nacional de Prevención de Desastres (national
centre for Prevention of
Disasters)
DART Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of Tsunamis
DFID Department for International Development
EWS Early Warning System
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
Fonden Foundation in support of humanitarian purposes to enhance
researchfor the
protection of the environment
GPS Global Positioning System
HSI Hospitals Safety Index
IBC International Building Code
IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
JMA Japan Meteorological Agency
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
NSF National Science Foundation
ONEMI Oficina Nacional de Emergencia del Ministerio del Interior
(National Office of
Emergency of the Interior Ministry
PAHO Pan American health Organization
SMS Short Message Service
UWI University of the West Indies
WHO World Health Organization
4
BACKGROUND
While the timing of an earthquake cannot be predicted, scientific
evidence shows that the geological faults impacting Jamaica have
the potential to generate an earthquake of magnitude seven or more
on the Richter scale. The United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP) Jamaica commissioned a Seismic Exploratory Mission in March
2013, which drew attention to the seismic risk that Jamaica is
exposed to, and highlighted possible areas of intervention that
could strengthen Jamaica’s risk reduction and preparedness. This
mission served as an initiating point of a long-term process that
would help Jamaica improve its earthquake preparedness, recovery
and response.
In consultation with the UNDP Regional Service Centre and in
collaboration with the Office of Disaster Preparedness and
Emergency Management (ODPEM), UNDP Jamaica hosted a Seismic Risk
Forum, 8-9 January, 2014, which aimed to raise awareness regarding
the seismic risk being faced by Jamaica while simultaneously
galvanizing key stakeholders’ support on this issue.
The forum brought together international, regional and national
experts, and included public and private sector participation, to
raise awareness, share experiences and make recommendations on
seismic risk preparedness. As a platform, this event is expected to
develop national and regional level project proposals and assist
the Government in effective seismic risk preparedness.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Seismic Risk Forum benefitted from 18 presentations by local
and overseas experts in the area of risk reduction. Presentations
were organised in four thematic areas: (i)The Jamaican context,
which examined the current level of national risk in order to
determine the required level of preparedness; (ii) Best Practices
and Lessons Learnt, in which global and regional experts from
Japan, Mexico, Haiti, Dominican Republic and Chile shared their
knowledge and experiences; (iii) Resilience and Critical
Infrastructure which emphasised strategies for building resilience
at community and national levels and involved extensive private
sector input; and (iv) Working Groups designed to explore and
encourage broad-based, cross-sectoral stakeholder contribution in
identifying priorities for the recommendation of further action in
improving national risk reduction.
The opening ceremony was comprised of opening remarks by Mr.
Richard Thompson, Acting Director General of ODPEM; Dr Arun
Kashyap, UN Resident Coordinator/UNDP Resident Representative, and
the Hon. Noel Arscott, Minister of Local Government and Community
Development.
Session 1 explored the level of risk Jamaica currently faced.
Current research findings by the Earthquake Unit of the University
of the West Indies (UWI) on the status of the tectonic system
around Jamaica and the northern Caribbean along with evidence of
stress building up in Jamaica itself demonstrated the high
probability of a strong earthquake in Jamaica in the near future.
Lack of readiness was demonstrated in several presentations. First,
assessment of the impact of an earthquake of the magnitude of the
1907 earthquake (within mmi zone of 5-11) should it happen in
Kingston today, revealed a projected estimated damage of 95 per
cent of the island’s productive capacity. Direct damage is
estimated to be US$5.5 billion (15 per cent of pre-disaster
socioeconomic infrastructure). Critical infrastructure located
along the coast of Kingston would be particularly vulnerable to
intense shaking owing to the soil on which they were constructed.
Further focus on critical infrastructure through rapid visual
screening of 77 critical facilities in the Kinston and St Andrew
revealed that over 70 per cent of the buildings assessed are sited
on soil vulnerable to intense shaking.
5
A detailed review of the legal and institutional arrangements in
relation to disaster preparedness, measured against International
Disaster Relief Law (IDRL) guidelines, demonstrated the absence of
the appropriate legislative framework required to deal adequately
with a seismic event. The current framework is particularly weak in
terms of dealing with policies and guidelines for the entry of
external aid in the event the local machinery was compromised. The
findings of a national earthquake and tsunami simulation
implemented between January 17 and February 16 of 2012 further
emphasized the need for a coordinated, national approach to
disaster response planning in terms of the documentation plans and
policies for consistent and uniform response across all hazardous
events.
A more recent threat that is acknowledged in the Caribbean region
is the high possibility of tsunamis. The work being carried out by
the IOC Intergovernmental Coordination Group in the development of
early warning systems for coastal hazards for the Caribbean and
adjacent regions was described.
Session 2 focused on the lessons that could be learnt from
countries whose emphasis on disaster planning and risk reduction
provide excellent models for the development Jamaica’s roadmap to
seismic resilience. Recurring themes in this session were: the need
for the continuous review and improvement of disaster plans with
the passage of each disaster; the need for rigorous public
education programmes on natural hazards; proactive development of
community response plans such as evacuation; the development and
testing of construction material and building techniques; and a
deep focus on preparation for every eventuality.
Session 3 highlighted the need for a multi-sectoral approach to
disaster planning and resilience and called on the expertise of
individuals from the business community, engineering sector,
medical field and government. A dominant theme was the discussions
surrounding the promulgation of the impending Building Act that is
necessary for the creation of a new building code for Jamaica that
would address the many concerns related to the vulnerability of
critical infrastructure. Business continuity planning was another
major theme and was addressed by both the private and public
sectors – Digicel and the Bureau of Standards of Jamaica – clearly
demonstrating the benefits of preparation and foresight. Forward
planning was also highlighted in the progress report of the safe
hospitals initiative that was adopted by PAHO member states at the
45th Directing Council.
The Working Groups were convened in five thematic areas to identify
capacity development and resource needs, regulatory and other
requirements, roles and responsibilities and communication needs,
to be adopted in preparing recommendations for short-, medium- and
long-term strategies that will be taken at various levels
(local/national/sectoral) in the preparation of the national
roadmap for seismic resilience. The thematic areas explored
were:
1. Identification of Gaps, Capacity and Development needs, and
Resources Challenges 2. The Regulatory Framework, Including
Building Codes (and Inspection Systems), Standards,
Zoning and Physical Planning Issues 3. Critical facilities,
Lifeline Systems and Vital Infrastructure Resilience 4. Governance,
Institutional issues, Roles and Responsibilities, Public and
Private Sector
Relationship Building 5. Awareness Building, Sensitization and
Communication.
Summaries of the working group presentations with recommendations
for the way forward were presented in the final plenary
session.
6
The Closing Ceremony was comprised of remarks by Mr. Richard
Thompson, Director General of ODPEM; Dr Arun Kashyap, UN Resident
Coordinator/UNDP Resident Representative, and; the Hon. Robert
Pickersgill, Minister of Water, Land, Environment and Climate
Change.
THE OPENING CEREMONY
The opening ceremony, chaired by Mrs. Delmares White, was comprised
of remarks by Mr. Richard Thompson, Acting Director General of
ODPEM, Dr. Arun Kashyap, UN Resident Coordinator/UNDP Resident
Representative, and the Hon. Noel Arscott, Minister of Local
Government and Community Development.
Mr. Thompson emphasized the timeliness of the organization of this
forum in keeping with the intense seismic activity in Jamaica. He
noted that up to 20,000 earthquakes were detected annually. He
identified eastern Jamaica and the Montpelier/New Market area as
the most active areas in the island with November to January being
the most active period.
Mr. Thompson reiterated ODPEM’s commitment to significantly
increasing Jamaica’s earthquake awareness and preparedness through
vulnerability mapping, enforcement of compliance with regard to
building codes and standards, public education, and planning for
earthquake preparation.
Dr. Arun Kashyap noted the importance of the forum in facilitating
the creation of a roadmap to seismic safety through the
understanding of global best practices. Dr Kashyap commended the
Dominican Republic, Haiti, Chile, Mexico and Japan for their
support and encouragement of Jamaica’s seismic risk planning
through the sharing of their knowledge and experience.
Dr. Kashyap also anticipated that the forum would facilitate
improved South South Cooperation in earthquake preparedness and
identify priorities for national preparedness and reduce earthquake
vulnerability through the creation of an efficient response system
for recovery, in order to reduce trauma and improve the lives of
people.
Dr Kashyap emphasized the commitment of the United Nations in
helping the Jamaican Government to manage risk and to work with all
stakeholders in this regard.
The Hon. Noel Arscott recognized that building collapse was the
major cause of death in an earthquake, and believed that ensuring
building integrity is the first line of defense in earthquake
preparedness.
Minister Arscott referred to the imminent passage of the Building
Act, which will be tabled on March 31 and which the government
recognizes as essential for building integrity, resilience and
enhancing the effectiveness of the response system. He pointed to
the creation of a National Disaster Committee including parish and
zonal committees, the establishment of a National Disaster Fund,
the establishment of efficient evacuation plans and the mapping of
high risk areas.
The Minister noted the importance of educating community members to
be first responders.
The Minister also acknowledged the critical support of
international partners and welcomed OCHA’s proposal for Jamaica to
be a sub-regional hub for disaster response.
Speeches from the Opening Ceremony are provided in the
Appendices.
7
SESSION 1: THE JAMAICAN CONTEXT
Session 1 - chaired by Mr. Franklin McDonald, Visiting Scholar,
York University - was primarily a diagnostic session focused on
Jamaica. It presented up-to-date research on the levels of seismic
activity, the vulnerability of critical infrastructure and
buildings as well as provided an analysis of the legal framework
that currently exists in Jamaica. This session also looked at the
early warning system being developed to detect tsunamis and other
coastal hazards.
1.1 Recent Research Findings on Faults in Jamaica – Professor Simon
Mitchell, Head, Department of Geography and Geology, University of
the West Indies (UWI)
Professor Mitchell outlined the technical background on seismic
activity in Jamaica. He shared current research findings from the
Earthquake Unit of the UWI on the status of the tectonic system
around Jamaica and in the northern Caribbean.
Professor Mitchell noted that the research was facilitated by the
Unit’s digital seismometer and motion accelerometer networks that
provide coverage in key areas across Jamaica. The Unit also
operated a 36- station GPS network to measure the movement of
plates and the stress accumulation across Jamaica in order to
determine the level of earthquake risk to which the island is
subject.
The professor located seismic activity in Jamaica in the context of
the island’s position on the northern extreme of the Caribbean
plate, which stretches from just south of Cuba along the islands of
the Lesser Antilles and along the coast of Central America. He
reported that research shows that the Caribbean plate is moving to
the east relative to the North American Plate at a rate of two cm a
year while Jamaica, itself, is moving west-north-west relative to
the Caribbean plate at about 1 cm a year.
The Earthquake Unit is in the process of remapping Jamaica to
identify both active and inactive faults. The research shows that
there is significantly greater movement in the north of the island
as opposed to smaller movement in the south and some 300
earthquakes were recorded in Jamaica a year.
Professor Mitchell noted that the movements of earthquakes are not
uniform across Jamaica and most are concentrated in a cluster in
the western Blue Mountain. Professor Mitchell pointed to a large
concentration of faults near Kingston, which increases its
vulnerability to earthquake risk. In addition the basic geology of
the Kingston area exacerbates the risk, as much of the area
consists of alluvial deposits that were subject to amplified ground
acceleration and extensive liquefaction.
The Professor noted that in going forward the Earthquake Unit
intends to i) expand its broadband digital seismometer and strong
motion accelerometer networks; ii) complete the geological mapping
of Jamaica and produce a new tectonic map that can be integrated
with earthquake epicentre data; iii) undertake geophysical analysis
of faults and paleoseismic studies to access fault activity; iv)
increase coverage of seismic microzonation maps; and v) increase
its outreach programme to better inform Jamaicans of earthquake
risks.
1.2 1907 Earthquake in a 2007 Scenario – Mr. Maurice Mason,
Institute of Sustainable Development
Mr. Mason presented the findings of a simulation of a magnitude 6.5
earthquake, in the order of the 1907 earthquake, on the modern
Jamaican economy, with emphasis on the Kingston Metropolitan Area
(KMA).
Mr. Mason observed that at the epicenter the 1907 earthquake
produced a shaking intensity of 9 mmi. The updated microzonation of
the Kingston and St Andrew region shows that the shaking resulting
from
8
an earthquake of a similar magnitude is estimated above 9 with the
probability of increasing up to 12. The study’s estimates take into
account the high probability of liquefaction in calculating the
damage and resulting economic impact of a number of critical
infrastructures.
Key economic facilities are located in the most high risk locations
in Kingston and other parts of the island that would experience
liquefaction. Among these are:
The Kingston Wharves, which accounts for 100 per cent of the
island’s transshipment activity and 60 per cent of the port
facility, the Ocho Rios Cruise Ship pier, which handles 60 per cent
of the cruise ship arrivals, and the Norman Manley International
Airport (NMIA), which represents 50 percent of the island’s airport
facility.
The Petrojam Oil Refinery Electricity generation facilities.
Seventy five per cent of the island’s generating capacity
would
be at risk. Consultation with the Jamaica Public Service yielded an
estimate of at least four to five months to regain productivity,
resulting in 911,705 job losses over the period.
Lifeline facilities such as the Kingston Public Hospital (KPH),
Bustamante Children’s Hospital, National Chest Hospital, and
University Hospital of the West Indies (UHWI) are all within the
liquefaction zone with a probability of experiencing an intensity
of shaking above 9.
The transportation sector would be severely disrupted
The study also looked at the possible damage to residential areas
in the KMA (70% at risk) and Portmore, St Catherine (70% at risk).
One primary concern highlighted is the inadequacy of insurance
penetration currently in the range of 20-40 per cent, leaving the
majority of householders unable to finance reconstruction.
An earthquake of the magnitude of the 1907 earthquake (within mmi
zone of 5-11) would damage 95 per cent of the island’s productive
capacity with direct damage estimated at US$5.5 billion.
1.3 Legal Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction: Jamaica Red Cross
– Ms. Tania Chambers, legal researcher
Ms. Chambers presented the findings of a study commissioned by the
Jamaica Red Cross and conducted in collaboration with ODPEM, the
Ministry of Local Government and Community Development and DFID
(UKAID) as part of an international process championed by Red
Cross. The objective was to examine the country’s ability to
effectively handle relief activities for a truly large disaster,
such as that in Haiti.
The study undertook a detailed review of the legal and
institutional arrangements in relation to disaster preparedness and
measured these against International Disaster Relief Law (IDRL)
guidelines. While a proliferation of plans and guidelines related
to disaster response exist, they are all embedded in non- legal
documents and are for the most part event-specific, pointing to the
need for an overarching national plan that covers all disasters.
The National Disaster Act does not include the detailed guidelines
and instructions necessary to guide proper implementation of
efforts.
Damage assessment infrastructure is in place at varying levels but
a defined stream of communication among local relief coordination
agencies and managers and donors that may be mobilized from outside
is needed.
The national response differs from event to event in terms of
international disaster relief, with varying processes and
standards. Several mechanisms that currently exist are the result
of ministerial decisions
9
and discretion, rather than being grounded in law. The study
acknowledged differences in the treatment of existing aid agencies,
such as UN agencies, where strong relationships were already
established, as opposed to new donors. It was noted that while the
coordination and management processes are effective for the scale
and type of disasters that we routinely faced, appropriate
guidelines are needed for situations that might have to be
coordinated externally. In addition there is no proactive mechanism
for coordinating ad hoc donors, no registration or monitoring
regime for new donor, nor set eligibility processes for new
international donors to access concessions. Ms. Chambers shared the
standards and ethical guidelines that apply to donors on the
initiation of relief. She pointed out that the declaration of an
emergency is a high level policy issue as it has varying
implications. While the declaration triggers special funding from
donor partners and special waivers, it could also have a negative
impact on local industry, such as tourism, especially in cases
where the event is contained in a small area. Currently, the
declaration of a disaster remains discretionary with no set
triggers/parameters. 1.4 Rapid Seismic Assessment of Selected
Critical Infrastructure: Mrs. Karema Aikens-Mitchell
Mrs. Aikens-Mitchell presented the results of a rapid visual
screening of 77 critical facilities in the Kingston and St Andrew
area through the application of the FEMA methodology.
The methodology determines the probability of collapse based on
location, structural and non-structural characteristics. Structural
characteristics included elements such as building type, shape,
height and number of stories; and non-structural elements were soil
type and date of construction. Soil types were graded from A to F,
with A being hard rock and F being soft soil with a high water
content.
The objective was to determine seismic vulnerability of the
buildings – categorizing them as those that would perform well
(constituting a pass) and those that would not (constituting a
fail) and which were, therefore, in need of retrofitting. Over 70
per cent of the buildings assessed were sited on soil type D and
thus could be expected to experience significant shaking in the
event of an earthquake. The 77 facilities comprised police
stations, fire stations and health centres and performed as
follows:
Critical Facility % Pass % Fail Could not be assessed
Police Stations 19 65 16
Fire Stations 14 57 29
Health Centres 30 61 9
The high vulnerability of the facilities assessed indicated limited
capacity for effective response in the event of a major
earthquake.
The programme was being expanded to look at critical facilities in
Annotto Bay, Falmouth and Linstead.
1.5 National Simulation Exercise & Rapid Seismic Assessment
case Study – Michelle Edwards, Senior Director Preparedness and
Emergency Operations (ODPEM)
Mrs. Edwards presented the findings of a national earthquake and
tsunami simulation implemented between January 17 and February 16
of 2012. The scenario developed by the Seismic Research Centre,
UWI, was an earthquake with the magnitude of 7.1 and a depth of 5
km. The epicenter was located in Trinityville, St Thomas. The
exercise was aimed at building capacity in earthquake preparedness
and
10
response capabilities by assessing the deficiencies in the current
response system and determining how to address them.
The findings revealed the need for the revision of national plans
and sub-plans. Standard Operating Procedures will be
revised/updated and new policies/plans prepared as necessary.
Jamaica will require external assistance to conduct training in
urban search and rescue, and an emergency communications network
linking all first responders and key agencies must be
acquired.
Policies are needed to guide the development of a national plan as
well as plans at the agency level. A major issue was the clear
definition of roles, responsibilities and reporting
relationships.
Gaps identified by the exercise included the following:
The absence of an efficient communication plan in the aftermath of
an earthquake, with an overreliance on private providers for
communication;
The absence of an appropriate transportation and evacuation plans
that addressed traffic congestion; evacuation of vulnerable members
of the community;
Emergency shelter arrangements.
Revision of the National Earthquake Plan representing all
stakeholders and including protocols related to the reception and
employment of international USAR and health assistance that were
integrated with INSARAG/OCHA procedures;
Development of a protocol for the handling of post-earthquake
fatalities; Development of national, parish and community tsunami
evacuation plans for all areas at risk; Development of intensive
national public education programme; Establishment and
implementation of a PEOC training programme based on a
realistic
earthquake scenario; Development of a comprehensive communications
plan.
1.6 Tsunami and Other Coastal Hazards: Early Warning System – Dr.
Cesar Toro, Caribbean Tsunami Working Group
Dr. Toro reported on the progress of the IOC Intergovernmental
Coordination Group, comprised of 32 member states and 16
territories in the Caribbean, regarding the development of early
warning systems for coastal hazards for the Caribbean and adjacent
regions. Dr. Toro emphasized the growth in the coastal population
and critical infrastructure in the Caribbean over the past half
century. Hundreds of thousands of people live and work in tsunami
prone zones and in any given day over 50,000 tourists might be
found on the beaches of the region.
An assessment of the system in January 2010 after the earthquake in
Haiti revealed that:
sea level was scarcely monitored during the event; some National
Warning Centres (NWC) did not know how to access sea level data
over the GTS
or over the IOC Sea Level Observation Facility website; most NWCs
did not use any numerical models during the event; and countries
placed in the watch level were able to distribute warnings and even
preventively
evacuated some areas.
11
Dr. Toro underscored the efficiency of the system in providing real
time data, noting that 109 of 126 core Caribe EWS stations (86 % of
the system) were operational. Seven DART stations and 50 sea level
gauges had been installed through the efforts of external donors.
It was now for territories to maintain and monitor the stations. He
also pointed to the efficiency of GPS systems in detecting and
monitoring tsunamis. The US NSF funded project COCONet of UNAVCO,
which had integrated regional partners and facilitated a dramatic
increase in the GPS assets in the region with 85 stations now
providing data.
Dr. Toro reported that 10 member states have undertaken tsunami
modeling and that there is now a need for the development of a
unified data base of tsunami sources, including seismic, submarine
landslides and volcanic activity.
In 2013 an MoU was signed between Barbados and UNESCO/IOC for the
establishment of the Caribbean Tsunami Information Center through
Funding from UNDP/ERC Project and UNESCO. He reported that
currently there are 32 tsunami ready communities in the
Caribbean.
Dr. Toro emphasized that despite the infrequency of tsunamis, the
region must be vigilant in maintaining early warning systems and
provide the necessary public education to facilitate
preparedness.
DISCUSSION
Professor Fred Krimgold alluded to the fact that many critical
facilities were located on Kingston Harbour and questioned whether
these core organizations were aware of the risk associated with
this deep investment and whether they had the related geotechnical
information. He also questioned whether the engineering
documentation could be accessed for public information.
Mr. McDonald responded that more thorough investigation was
required in this regard.
SESSION 2: BEST PRACTICES & LESSONS LEARNT
Chaired by Mr. Horace Glaze, Deputy Director General, ODPEM, this
session included lessons learnt and best practices from major
earthquakes in Japan, Chile, Haiti, the Dominican Republic and
Mexico to inform Jamaica’s preparedness and promote opportunities
for international cooperation.
2.1 Lessons Learnt from the Great East Japan and Great Hanshin
Earthquakes – Mr. Haruo Kubo, Japan International Cooperation
Agency (JICA)
Mr. Kubo shared lessons learnt from the great East Japan (March
2011) and Hanshin (January 1995) earthquakes. The former resulted
in the death of over 20,000 people, the evacuation of 480,000
people, destruction of approximately 300,000 buildings, and cost
the country approximately 16.9 trillion yen. The latter resulted in
the death of 6,434 people, the evacuation of 317,000 people, the
destruction of approximately 249,000 buildings and cost the country
approximately 9.6 million yen.
The 9.0 magnitude Great Japan Earthquake shook for six minutes.
There was minimal damage from the earthquake itself; the major
damage was a result of the ensuing tsunami. Ninety per cent of
deaths were attributed to the tsunami, which inundated the coastal
and flatlands area up to six km inland. He pointed to the
weaknesses in the tsunami early warning system.
The response of the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) was to
develop an improved tsunami warning system that incorporated the
use of 170 tide gauges/tsunami meters, 15 GPS buoys and 36
offshore-water-pressure gauges. The new system went into operation
in December 2012. Since March
12
2013 the JMA has issued tsunami warnings to indicate tsunami
heights of one meter, three meters, and in excess of three meters,
the latter indicating a huge earthquake. This new system can detect
an earthquake 20-30 seconds earlier and a tsunami up to 20 minutes
earlier than the previous early warning system.
Counter-measures adopted for earthquakes include the construction
of earthquake resilient buildings. Counter-measures for tsunamis
include planning an evacuation programme in advance, conducting
evacuation drills, increasing scenario planning, and preparing for
disaster by learning from previous disasters.
2.2 Lessons Learnt from the 2010 Haitian Earthquake – Dr. Claude
Preptit, Office of Mines and Energy, Haiti
Dr. Claude Preptit outlined the lessons learnt from the earthquake
of January 2010. There had been no major earthquake in Haiti for
over two centuries when the earthquake struck leaving some 250,000
people dead, over 300,000 injured, 1.5 million homeless, critical
infrastructure destroyed and an economic loss of over US$8
billion.
The primary reasons for the disaster were identified as
follows:
the absence of a building code and lack of professionalism in the
construction industry; low levels of awareness among the population
of a seismic hazard; lack of response planning and absence of a
national programme to reduce the effect of
earthquake risk ; and lack of seismologists and the microzonation
of the main urban centres.
The country recognized that the disaster revealed its inability to
handle the effects of the earthquake. These inabilities included
inadequate search and rescue operations and first aid services,
difficulties inherent in managing 1.5 million homeless people, and
managing large volumes of humanitarian aid in the face of
compromised capacity and lack of planning.
The country looked at producing a roadmap for the reduction of the
effect of seismic hazards which would involve:
the establishment of a seismic surveillance network; microzonation
of Port-au-Prince to facilitate rebuilding; collecting geological
data; mapping landslide hazards, topographic effects, liquefaction
hazards and soil classification;
reduction of hazard factors through the evaluation, repair and
construction of earthquake resistant buildings and the
establishment of a national building code;
training and education of the people regarding seismic risk and the
preparation for seismic hazards. The programme would start in
schools to ensure the buy-in of the youth. The appropriate training
of construction workers was also an important element of this
initiative; and
the development of a preparation and response programme in
collaboration with the Red Cross and which will include the tsunami
exercise in Cap Haitien.
Dr. Preptit observed that the effects of the January 2010 event
represented an anomaly in terms of devastation and it was the
country’s inability to handle the effects that had been the true
disaster. The long-term objective of Haiti’s programme was to
reduce risk so that in the event of another earthquake
13
the damage would be drastically reduced. The primary lesson, he
said, was to prepare, prepare and prepare. The cost of preparing
was significantly less than rebuilding.
2.3 Implementation of the National Seismic Risk Plans, Best
Practices and Lessons Learnt in the Dominican Republic: Ms. Luz
Bonilla, national Emergency Commission, Dominican Republic
Ms. Bonilla reported on the progress of the implementation of
national seismic risk plans in the Dominican Republic. The
Dominican Republic shares fault lines with Haiti and the event of
2010 was a strong indication that the country needed to urgently
address planning for seismic risk. The earthquakes in Chile and
Japan provided further stimulus for proceeding swiftly.
In Feb 2010, the then president of the Dominican Republic, Dr.
Leonel Fernández Reyna, mandated the Department of Land Use
Planning and Development to initiate a process of analysis and
institutional consultations to define strategic areas of action to
reduce seismic risk. Two committees were convened to prepare
proposals to reduce risk factors related to seismic hazards and
build capacity in the areas of prevention, mitigation, response and
recovery, as well as resilience in potentially affected
communities.
The Plan was aligned with the National Plan for Prevention,
Mitigation and Response to Disasters (Law 147/02; the National Plan
for Emergencies and the National Earthquake Contingency Plan and
supports elements of the National Strategy for Development
2030.
The objectives of the plan are to:
generate knowledge regarding seismic phenomena and produce key
information that could advance planning and land use
processes;
facilitate analysis of the hazard and vulnerability components and
the approximation of seismic risk;
use appropriate technologies for information management and
generate products that supported planning processes;
provide appropriate training for those at an institutional level
who would assume responsibility for the coordination and
facilitation of risk reduction management activities;
incorporate communication strategies in the seismic risk reduction
activities, and test the efficacy of the programs outlined in the
plan through the implementation of pilot
projects.
Strategies to mitigate risk included safety plans for critical
infrastructure such as reservoirs, hospitals and schools through
evaluation and retrofitting where necessary. The microzonation of
Santiago de Los Caballeros as well as greater Santo Domingo was
considered necessary to proper development planning as well as the
regulation of construction with respect to the seismic resistance
building code. Capacity development of construction industry
personnel would involve training at tertiary level. Prudent
financial management was seen as another integral component of risk
planning and the establishment of a national fund for prevention
mitigation and response was to be developed and plans put in place
for the mobilization and management of resources from international
donors. Considerable challenges remain including:
dissemination of Decree 275-13 for the development of institutional
plans;
14
involvement and commitment at the political level for decision
making to enable the implementation of the plan, including
earmarking from the national budget ;
establishing the channels for action for the various strategic
goals set out in the Plan and the public projects that were being
implemented in the territory;
ensuring the involvement of different institutional and social
actors in the implementation process, and
establishing routes that would achieve the strategic objectives set
forth in the plan.
DISCUSSION
Dr. David Smith, Institute of Sustainable Development, UWI, pointed
out that work being done in Haiti in microzoning and liquefaction
potential was similar to work that had been done by the Earthquake
Unit in Kingston. He questioned how Jamaica was ensuring the
translation of this information into building codes and practice,
and how Haiti ensured that new buildings followed lessons
learnt?
Dr. Preptit responded that the purely technical aspects were used
by engineers to ensure that buildings are constructed in resonance
with the soil type. Microzonation data will also be transferred
into a plan to be used by non-professionals. These are made
accessible and are not merely studies stored in a drawer.
Dr. Cesar Toro of UNESCO congratulated Haiti and the Dominican
Republic on the development of building codes and asked whether the
countries had the capacity to implement these codes and if all
construction was now subject to plan review and site
inspection.
Ms. Bonilla explained that in the Dominican Republic, the Ministry
of Public Works had made efforts to examine all infrastructures and
that private investors were required to go through the Ministry.
However, not all public investment received similarly rigorous
treatment and the ministry was not capable of supervising all
private construction to ensure compliance.
Dr. Preptit pointed out that many issues were long-term issues that
could not be solved in four years. He acknowledged that the
administration had many weaknesses and said the task was now to see
how the processes can be strengthened.
2.4 Earthquake Experiences from Mexico – Mr. Carlos
Gutierrez-Martinez and Mr. Leonardo Flores Corona, National Centre
for Disaster Prevention
Mr. Gutierrez described the creation of a national seismic network
in 2013 through the integration of all the seismic networks that
were previously operating independently using different standards.
An investment of US$45 million was made to establish a standardized
system for the collection and presentation of data. He emphasized
that the purpose of the network was not only to present data for
research purposes but to also function as a socially-oriented early
warning system. Simultaneously, a national tsunami early warning
system had been established to upgrade monitoring of
tsunamis.
Slope instability was also being researched as landslides were
triggered by earthquakes and heavy rainfall. A methodology had been
developed, to assign a susceptibility score to existing slopes. It
examined a combination of elements including: height of slope,
topography, history, geological and geotechnical factors, rock
structure and environmental factors such as water flow, vegetation
and land use. Scores ranged between 3.1 and 15.3 with low
susceptibility being a score of less than five and high
susceptibility a score of more than ten.
15
The development of a large structure laboratory was another
initiative described. The laboratory simulated the behavior of
structures under earthquake conditions so as to test the structure
of a typical dwelling in Mexico, then retrofitting the structure
for further testing for submission to the building code committee.
This experiment facilitated the calculation of appropriate
specifications for earthquake resistant structures.
A single strategy was developed for dwellings and buildings
nationally, which also took into account site selection as well as
rainfall, fire and strong winds. The project looked at the
behaviour patterns of reinforced concrete, adobe and wire mesh with
anchors and other cheap materials. The research showed the people
that prevention and mitigation is not the sole responsibility of
the government but a shared responsibility.
Mr. Gutierrez said that Mexico had been working for last 12 years
on the National Risk Atlas – the main tool for land use and human
development, which would soon be applied everywhere in the
country.
Mr. Corona shared information on the post-earthquake evaluation
system designed by CENAPRED as a method for structural safety
assessment. Mexico’s National Emergency Committee was comprised of
14 groups that had responsibility for various aspects of national
emergencies operating under three main categories – operations,
logistics and management. In order to share data in a consistent
and uniform way, a standard evaluation form has been designed for
use by all agencies and branches of the Emergency Committee.
CENAPRED, structural and earthquake engineering associations and
relevant universities and institutions collaborated to develop the
appropriate documents to cover all likely scenarios. Information
required includes building location, building use, structural
details, system vulnerability, and damage assessment. Several
documents were developed to ensure that data collection was carried
out in a standardized and consistent way across the country and in
relation to all events. These included three categories of
evaluation forms, evaluation manuals and a range of training
material in various media such as presentations and videos.
2.5 National Civil Protection System: ONEMI Evolution – Ms. Carmen
Correo, National Emergency Office of Chile (ONEMI), Civil
protection Division, Coordinator National Disaster Risk Reduction
Planning
Ms. Correo shared Chile’s history of earthquakes noting that the
country had experienced 90 earthquakes since 1570; 200 quakes every
day (perceptible and not perceptible); and the earthquake with the
highest magnitude recorded in history. The 2010 earthquake was
followed by a tsunami with both causing widespread damage and
causing the death of 525 people.
ONEMI’s analysis of the situation identified several weaknesses in
the standing plan and the recommendation for the creation of a new
national Emergency and Civil Protection System that incorporated
disaster risk strategy with the strong participation of civil
society. ONEMI’s strategic objectives were to: increase confidence,
strengthen regional offices and ensure quick and effective
response.
Confidence in ONEMI was increased through actions such as: the
development of integrated safety plans for schools; community
evacuation drills; the preparation and dissemination of
recommendations for actions before, during and after an earthquake;
consistent communication with citizens and the encouragement of the
development of emergency networks.
16
Strengthening the regional offices included development of
integrated early warning systems, 24 hour monitoring and
surveillance, telecommunications redundancy and mobile operational
centres. An important initiative was the standardization of
regional emergency plans and procedures and the improvement of
protocols and practices. Intensive training was conducted among
regional emergency committees and the improvement and expansion of
early warning systems.
Strengthening response focused on the implementation of a four-year
project which will see the strengthening of the seismic monitoring
network; telecommunications redundancy and education regarding
evacuation procedures and routes.
DISCUSSION
Christopher Lue, Jamaica Institute of Architects, questioned
whether the housing type referred to in the presentation was an
urban house or whether it could be sited in any location.
Mr. Gutierrez noted that the model was intended for people with
primary education so they could understand how to apply these
materials. He added that there was a separate document for
engineers and architects. In some cases the owner was able to buy
these materials. During an emergency the financial institution
called Fonden assessed damage in the area and provided the material
and sometimes the money to assist people.
A question was asked as to whether the relatively low levels of
lives lost in the Chilean earthquake could be credited to the
building codes and regulatory information.
Ms. Correo confirmed that the building codes contributed to the low
level of deaths: 524 deaths in an earthquake of a magnitude of 8
mmi is a very low number. Since the earthquake in 1906 Chile
started to create a building code which was improved with every
earthquake event. This most recent event told us that we had to
study acceleration of soil so that it could be applied in the
code.
UNAIDS Country coordinator noted that the lesson from Haiti was to
always keep people in mind. Efforts had been concentrated on
rebuilding and the people were secondary. A lot of money had been
spent on the intermediate solutions which have become long-term.
Keeping people in mind meant, for example, thinking about housing
that allowed for sex and privacy. Condoms should be included in
care packages.
Thomas Turner, Business Solutions, noted that the General
Penitentiary was damaged in the 1907 earthquake and this could
happen again. He questioned how Haiti and Mexico planned to deal
with the structural integrity of the prisons.
Dr. Preptit acknowledged that in Haiti the prisoners had escaped
and there had been a spike in crime after the earthquake. Prison
would be rebuilt in keep with the seismic standards. Mexico
Mr. Gutierrez responded that those types of buildings were A type
in Mexico and should stand up if an earthquake occurred.
SESSION 3: RESILIENCE AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Chaired by Mrs. Eleanor Jones, Managing Director, Environmental
Solutions Limited, this session focused on building resilience at
the community and the national levels and included discussions on
policy formulation and implementation, infrastructure integrity,
legal and regulatory framework, adherence to standards and business
continuity planning.
17
3.1 Earthquakes and Critical Infrastructure – Professor Fred
Krimgold, Director of Risk Reduction
Programme at Virginia Tech and Director of the Advanced Research
Institute.
Professor Krimgold addressed the subject of critical Infrastructure
resilience, and area that had been receiving increasing attention
from engineering, urban planning and risk managers in relation to
continuity of service in urban infrastructure systems.
He demonstrated the complexity and the interconnectedness of the
infrastructural system showing how the interconnectedness and
interdependency of various aspects of the system.
Professor Krimgold gave an example of a cascading failure problem
which might result from this interconnectedness through the
description of the response to an emergency call to the fire
response system which relied on telecommunication, transportation
and water systems to do its job. He emphasized the need for
analysis to determine how a city like Kingston might function in
event of an earthquake, what failures might occur and the action
needed to interrupt these dependencies through a dedicated
emergency system. For example, emergency generation to
replace/support a service like fire station or water pump, cell
tower in event of loss of power.
He noted that it was in the area of budget that decisions could be
made about coordinated cross-sector investments that could lead to
resolution of interdependency issues.
He recommended the decentralization of some critical services to
create smaller autonomous, independent services and reduce
vulnerability to geographic hazards like earthquakes. The master
planning function should utilize geological information and types
of analyses seen in microzonation in the development of
infrastructure and buildings and population. He noted that
regulation was essential in an environment where people failed to
learn from past experience. The regulatory process should be
coupled with the budgetary process in a way that expresses the
present cost of future risk.
3.2 Role of the Private Sector and the Experience of Digicel in the
Haiti 2012 Earthquake – Mr. Donovan Betancourt, Digicel
Corporation
Mr. Betancourt explained that most of the countries where the
company is operational are subject to high levels of environmental
risk. He presented a case study of Digicel’s investment in Haiti, a
high risk area, in demonstrating its business continuity planning
strategy.
Digicel launched its operations in Haiti in 2006 with the full
recognition that its operation was being sited in a high hazard
risk environment. The company’s capital investment saw the
construction of the largest and highest building in Port Au Prince.
It housed all the company’s switches as well as a storefront. Back
end facilities were diversified as part of mitigation planning. The
staff level in 2012 was approximately 1,000. By 2010, its tower
infrastructure comprised 900 sites.
In conducting its risk assessment exercise, Digicel examined the
political and social risks, security risk and potential
environmental risks – hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes and
inadequacy of the local building code. The company’s mitigation
strategy involved the insurance of all assets, security planning
for staff and property, providing electricity generation in the
field as required, ensuring all facilities buildings and towers
complied with international standards, backing up critical data
externally and instituting a rigorous business continuity
plan.
18
The impact of the 2010 earthquake on Digicel’s operations was
minimal: five deaths among staff; minimal infrastructural damage –
one switch lost (33 % of capacity); 40 of the 900 cell sites lost
(less than five per cent capacity).
On January 13, 2010, Digicel was among first responders and
immediately mobilized its business continuity plan. Technical teams
were in the island the following day to analyze needs of business
and staff, activate insurance plan, and establish a committee to
manage the Haitian situation.
Recovery saw full communication traffic restored within 24 hours;
the damaged switch was replaced in three months; in four months the
full network was restored. After six months they had achieved pre-
earthquake operations. Activities included the care of staff and
assistance to the government as well as groups from Jamaica who had
gone in to assist. The company recognized that profits came from
the people of Haiti.
Lessons learnt included the importance of a) compliance with
standards (in all the territories in which company operated), b)
forging relationship with the government and c) a proper business
continuity plan.
3.3 Safe Hospitals Study – Ms Shalini Jagnarine, PAHO
Ms Jagnaraine reported on the progress of the safe hospitals
programme which is jointly undertaken by PAHO and the WHO and which
mandated the improvement of hospitals to make them “safe from
disaster”.
In October 2004 safe hospitals initiative was adopted by PAHO
member states at the 45th Directing Council which mandated
participating members to improve on the resilience of new health
care facilities to natural and man-made disasters through the
adoption of Hospitals Safe from Disaster as a national risk
reduction policy. In 2005 the Hyogo Framework for Action had been
adopted by 169 countries UN member states with the goal that by
2015 countries should integrate disaster risk reduction planning in
the health sector.
The definition of a safe hospital is a health facility whose
services remain accessible and functioning at maximum capacity
during and immediately following the impact of a natural disaster.
The initiative was motivated by the fact that more than 50 per cent
of the 16,000 hospitals in Latin America and the Caribbean were
located in areas of high risk. In Jamaica Hurricane Gilbert damaged
24 health care facilities and over 5,000 beds were lost.
The Safe Hospitals Programme used a hospital safety index (HSI)
which had a checklist of145 items comprising structural,
non-structural and functional components, to categorize levels of
safety, ranging from A (high) B (average) and C (low). Components
which have been included to deal with seismic safety include: (i)
the interaction between structural and non-structural components;
(ii) interaction between masonry walls and with reinforced concrete
frames; (iii) spacing between buildings; (iv) irregularities in
design; (v) use of seismic drawings and (vi) base isolation.
In the Caribbean the programme successfully trained one hundred and
eight (108) professionals in four training courses and assessed 45
hospitals: one hospital received an A rating; 80 per cent a
category B and 18 per cent a category C. In Jamaica 10 hospitals
had been assessed with six receiving average safety ratings and
four low safety ratings.
19
Bustamante Nov-10 0.61 B
Falmouth Dec-12 0.34 C
Mandeville Dec-12 0.34 C
St. Ann's Bay Oct-10 0.55 B
University Hospital of the West Indies Nov-12 0.44 B
The majority of hospitals had minor structural deterioration with
eighty per cent (80%) of them expected to perform satisfactorily in
various natural hazards. In terms of non-structural performance the
major concern was poorly secured items. In regard to functional
safety eighty-one per cent (81%) of the hospitals did not have a
functioning disaster committee and half did not have proper
disaster or evacuation plans in place.
Currently there is a three-year project that is funded by Dipecho
with the goal of improving HSI index by five per cent (5%) for
seven facilities in six countries including the Falmouth and the
Black River Hospitals. The project also includes the establishment
of safe hospital committees in six countries and continued training
and awareness initiatives.
In moving forward the Safe Hospitals Programme will systematically
monitor progress in each country, improve the safety of existing
health facilities, develop and approve legislation on the design,
construction and rehabilitation of health facilities and strengthen
participation from non-health sectors.
3.4 Role of BCP and International Standards – Dr. Winston Davidson,
Bureau of Standards
Dr. Davidson explained that the Bureau of Standards of Jamaica
worked with companies to assist them in compliance with building
standards to bring them within a framework of globally competitive
standards, as well as helping businesses to develop business
continuity strategy for emergencies.
Important elements in a nation’s emergency planning include a unit
for occupational health and safety, standards in relation to
building code, and standards for facilities in the public health
system. He emphasized that emergency planning involved a
partnership among government, private sector and the community for
sustainability.
At the company level it is necessary to create a planning team,
including workers from all levels and those vital to daily business
functions. Disaster planning has to account for both man-made and
natural disasters. Man-made disasters include occupational health
and safety as some disasters are not explosive but gradual.
Efficient business continuity planning relied on: (i) the careful
assessment of how a company functions to determine which staff,
materials, activities and equipment are absolutely necessary to
keep the business operating; (ii) the review of the business
process flow chart to identify operations critical to its survival
and recovery; (iii) establishment of procedures for succession of
all management; (iv) identifying
20
key suppliers, shippers, resources and other businesses; (vi) a
plan for dealing with the office and equipment which should involve
adequate insurance coverage; and (vi) security and emergency
arrangements to deal with utility disruptions:
Also important to the BCP process was an efficient communication
system among staff and the promotion of family and individual
preparedness:
3.5 Status of the Jamaica Building Code – Mr. Noel DaCosta, Diageo
Limited
In his presentation Mr. DaCosta noted that building codes are the
first line of defense against damage from natural hazards. It
protects lives, limits physical damage and protects critical
structures on which society depends. Mr. DaCosta noted that seventy
per cent (70%) of the buildings in Jamaica had the probability of
collapse as they had been built without benefit of professional
inputs and forty to seventy per cent (40-70%) of buildings in
Kingston are expected to collapse under a major seismic
event.
Jamaica’s current building code was one hundred and six (106) years
old and as far back as the year 2000 the Jamaica Institute of
Engineers had led a team that made the decision to adopt the
International Building Code (IBC) as a base document. The JIE has
also sought to develop appropriate application documents that would
specify environmental and other conditions relevant for Jamaica, to
incorporate local hazards, and to incorporate any special
construction practices that may be peculiar to Jamaica. and energy
efficiency features. It was considered prudent to adopt the IBC as
it covered the designs that resisted all the natural hazards that
affected Jamaica, it was updated every three years, and it would
facilitate reinsurance.
Mr. DaCosta noted that in 2012 the JIE in collaboration with the
Bureau of Standards advocated for the development of a new Building
Act and Regulations. Several stakeholders from government, private
sector and NGOs had determined that among the things the Act should
achieve are the regulation of training standards, establishment of
a building appeals process and the facilitation of the
accreditation of building products, construction methods,
components and systems.
Mr. DaCosta highlighted the importance establishing of two bodies –
a Building Practitioners Board and a Building Advisory Council. The
Practitioners Board would: provide guidelines for licensing
systems; review the performance of building practitioners and apply
sanctions where appropriate; and make recommendations for licensing
qualifications and other issues
The Building Advisory Council would be responsible for advising
government on the administration of this Act and any Regulations
made; recommending policies, strategies, plans and programs for the
building Industry; and recommend ad-hoc committees to undertake
specific tasks.
The Building Code would facilitate the creation of a one stop shop’
approval at the Local Authority which would be able to issue
permits for modifications, change of use or occupancy, amongst
other permits.
So far the working group has reviewed several drafts of the
proposed Building Act and outstanding concerns involved ambiguity
surrounding the roles of building practitioners (implementers) and
building professionals (designers); the issues of “Monitoring
building use” and the “Mandatory inspection of certain buildings”
and to adequately address fines for breaching “Stop Notices”
21
3.6 Building Codes and other Regulations – Mr. Dwight Wilson,
Ministry of Local Government and Community Development
Mr. Wilson reported on the progress that had been made regarding
the passage of the Building Act to replace the existing KSAC
Building Act and the Parish Councils Building Act. The Bill is
currently with the Chief Parliamentary Council and the passing of
the Act is now scheduled to be completed by March 31, 2014.
He noted that the Government of Jamaica had taken the matter of
establishing the new Act very seriously and informed the forum that
the Act was designed to ensure safety of building and more so its
users. An important feature was the consideration it gave to ease
of access by the physically challenged. It also embraced the
introduction of new construction materials and techniques to
facilitate hazard resistance. There was also an emphasis on the use
of energy efficient processes.
The role of the Bureau of Standards is to adapt the IBC to suit
Jamaican conditions and this is to be achieved through the
establishment of working groups, committees and sub-committees to
deal with different aspects of design and construction. Seismic
inputs have not been fully included at this point and the Bureau is
working with the Earthquake Unit and ODPEM to ensure that the most
accurate and up to date information is incorporated into the
revision of the Code and the documents to be prepared subsequently.
The Code iss not intended to be a static document but would be
consistently updated every three years to facilitate inclusion of
the most current information on design.
SESSION 4: WORKING GROUPS
The session was facilitated by Dr. Margaret Jones-Williams who
introduced the five working groups and their group leaders. She
provided the background against which discussions should be
conducted and provided questions and issues for consideration in
guiding the discussion to ensure the desired outcomes. The Working
Groups were designed to encourage broad-based, cross-sectoral
stakeholder contribution to the identification and elaboration of
priorities in the key recommendations and to present concrete
actions which could feed into the Outcome Document and Roadmap to
be prepared. Working groups had one and one-half hours for
deliberation.
FINAL PLENARY
This session was facilitated by Dr. Elsie Laurence-Chounoune, UNDP
Deputy Resident Representative, and Mr. Franklin McDonald, UNDP
Technical Advisor/York University Visiting Scholar. At the end of
the time for the working groups, the groups were brought back to
plenary and each group was given five minutes to present the key
findings and topics discussed in each group, with time for
questions and answers from the audience.
Group 1: “Identification of Gaps, Capacity Development and Needs,
and Resource Challenges” led by Prof. Simon Mitchell, UWI
The group identified gaps in data collection resulting from the
need for seismologists. They recommended the recruitment of two
seismologists at the Earthquake Unit – a head seismologist and
junior seismologist – to ensure continuity; the acquisition of
equipment required for an efficient seismic network and sourcing of
the funding to achieve both. Other key points related to:
22
Property Insurance costs – current insurance coverage for
residential property was approximately 10 per cent and commercial
property 50 per cent. Additionally, insurance companies paid out on
only 15 per cent of their coverage.
Response capacity – Alternative arrangements were necessary to
support the standing response network if it were to break down as a
result of the intensity of an event.
Key facilities, such as airports and hospitals, which were located
on sites vulnerable to liquefaction, could suffer extensive damage
which might result in closure. Consequently areas that might be
used as suitable alternative landing sites should be identified.
Hospitals and health care facilities were also to be considered in
this regard.
Buildings of low quality such as prisons which were likely to
collapse and result in large loss of life would have implications
for human rights considerations. Appropriate retrofitting should be
considered.
Electronic banking facilities would be disrupted by an earthquake
with implications for the availability of cash and quick recovery
at community levels.
External communication channels could be disrupted if underwater
cables were destroyed.
Professor Krimgold referred to the need for a final microzonation
map with specific reference to Kingston.
Mr. Guiterrez raised the issue of insurance costs. The participant
from JIIC acknowledged that the regulations did require insurance
companies to reinsure at least 15 per cent of the total aggregate
overseas. A problem would arise only if damage exceeded that
amount.
Group 2: “The Regulatory Framework, Including Building Codes (and
inspection systems) standards, zoning and Physical Planning Issues”
led by Mr. Keith Ford, UNOCHA
The group noted that the promulgation of the Building Act would
result in the repeal of some existing legislation, such as the KSAC
Act. Issues related to the implementation of the Act
included:
Monitoring and enforcement to ensure discontinuation of building
designs by unlicensed draftsmen
Staffing levels at the parish councils and staffing and
modernization of all agencies Cost of transition, for example the
need for a building code that focused on small, informal
structures to enable them to withstand natural hazards Cost of IBC
documents Information and training – corruption was exacerbated by
lack of clarity and discretion
based on a system where inspectors are given some leeway Absence of
facilities and lack of ability to test building materials and
building systems Growth of informal settlements in vulnerable areas
and risk resilience of those buildings The illegal use of
buildings, for example the storage of hazardous chemicals
The group also identified specific priority areas including:
Training for industry personnel – local government officers,
building inspectors, professional practitioners, draftsmen and
artisans and establishing a standardized screening programme
Testing - Identifying resources within the government for testing
land. Recommended private/public partnership and collaboration with
the University of Technology. Utech training curricular might be
expanded to address building code requirement. Train extra
professionals to facilitate availability of a pool of contractual
workers. The group also addressed the need to acquire
simulators.
23
Public Information and education programmes to include education on
insurance
Marcia-Ford, Centre for Marine Sciences, University of the West
Indies, questioned what measures had been considered to ensure that
informal builders were caught in the certification process.
The response was that the parish council staff should be able to
identify and report uncertified buildings, hence the recommendation
of the modernization programmes to ensure staffing capacity for
monitoring. Training was to be carried out at two levels – with
UTech training at the professional level and HEART training the
artisans.
Keith Ford wanted to know how to access to archival information on
standards of buildings built years ago, for example the National
Stadium, to inform retrofitting to new standards.
Franklin McDonald advised that the status of the current building
stock was one of the issues which the roadmap was expected to
address.
Group 3: “Critical Facilities, Lifeline Systems and Vital
Infrastructure Resilience” led by Mrs. Karema Aikens-Mitchell,
ODPEM
The group looked at the resilience of both the structure and the
equipment within the buildings. They also explored the issue of
access to buildings, especially for emergency vehicles such as fire
trucks.
Issues addressed included:
contingency plans to be put in place for all critical facilities in
the event of failure of the facility itself
determining a mechanism to prioritizing levels of critical
facilities – institutional, civic and civil broadening the concept
of critical facilities to include non-traditional facilities such
as financial
institutions (including ATMs), convalescent homes, media houses,
and post offices Business continuity planning for government
Institutions
Recommended short-term solutions included the:
assessment of all critical public and private facilities refinement
of assessment process and the need to move from rapid assessment to
more
detailed assessment where required development and testing of BCP
to identify gaps and interdependencies enforcement of building
regulations in critical facilities – government needs to ensure
that its
own buildings, and in particular critical facilities, are
compliant
Medium to Long-Term Solutions put forward were as follows:
All critical institutions should be retrofitted for earthquake
resilience Development of a structure that could be set up quickly
and efficiently for short-term use in the
event that a critical facility fails Community centres to be built
to code to facilitate uses as alternative to any failed
critical
institutions Re-education of public on insurance options and the
development of special insurance products
for critical institutions
24
Training of personnel within critical facilities for continuity of
the operation Partnerships must be seen as two-way relationship
Preparing for alternative resources in case of the failure of a
major facility (power generation) Plans to be put in place for
residential retrofitting
Best Practices
The Mexican case study demonstrated the value of political will
Digicel Model in terms of BCP Indonesia in terms of land use and
land tenure British Virgin Islands – warehousing techniques pre and
post disaster Use of technology for simulating effects of seismic
activity of critical facilities and incorporating
findings into education programmes.
Stephen Hodges suggested that more attention should be paid to
making critical facilities resilient rather than the payment of
insurance as payouts were known to take up to six months and would
be of little value to critical aspect.
The response was that there was misunderstanding among the public
about insurance and an education drive would be useful. The kind of
insurance suggested for critical facilities would be akin to the
CCRFF with a short payout period. Franklin McDonald added that
there was a need for a conversation on the role of insurance in the
roadmap. He noted that there was a difference between how the
insurance sector saw itself vs the public perception
Marcia-Ford requested clarification regarding the definition of a
critical facility. She considered institutions such as supermarkets
and pharmacies as being critical to the community’s recovery.
Franklin McDonald noted that ODPEM and PIOJ needed to explore the
redefinition of essential and critical facilities. The concept of
what was considered critical and vital, globally, in relation to
recovery planning had expanded and would have to be dealt with in
the roadmap.
Group 4: “Governance, Institutional Issues, Roles and
Responsibilities, Public and Private Sector partnerships.” Led by
Michelle Edwards, ODPEM
The gaps identified in the area of technical preparation
were:
Urgent need of follow up to preliminary geotechnical work Inputs to
hazard mapping Expansion of the accelograph network
The technical experts had the responsibility to sensitize the
political directorate to get their buy in and ability to champion
roadmap.
Programmes and projects identified included:
The development of a code for business continuity Engagement of the
private sector in the discussion and follow up actions and
certification –
training of personnel within construction sector – Master Builders
would lead this initiative Encouragement of a volunteer leadership
programme to enhance community resilience –
partners to include the SDC, PDCs, ODPEM and NGOs
25
Engagement of and partnership with media to create greater
awareness of seismic risk and preparedness
Integration of schools in public education programme
Best Practices
Japan, Mexico, Turkey, Chile and California provided outstanding
models of building codes and testing, communication, coordination
and planning
The establishment of South/South partnerships among universities to
share information – Dominican Republic, Chile, Mexico (through
scholarships and fellowships)
Capacity building and development was to be achieved through the
identification and engagement of experts across sectors –
(responsibility to be identified)
The group recommended that the framework should involve interagency
cooperation and include development of standards and protocols for
all procedures. Overall responsibility and follow up to be
coordinated by the Office of the Prime Minister with the support of
ODPEM.
Group 5: “Awareness Building, Sensitization and Communication ” Led
by Delmares White, ODPEM
Gaps identified included:
Access to communication technology Identification of the various
target groups for the development of effective communication
strategies Integration of social media in getting message out
Knowledge gap regarding seismic risk Lack of a clearly defined
policy for communication in disaster/seismic risk preparedness
and
management and clearly defined roles and responsibilities
Mechanisms for improving external and internal communications
systems
Short-term Actions would see individual stakeholders taking
responsibility for the development of procedures and plans for
communication.
Medium-term Actions would see media, private sector and civil
society advocating for government to legislate best practices in
the communication process
Long-term Actions would see media, private sector, civil society
and government establishing mechanisms to facilitate collaboration
on the successful implementation of regulations, policies,
protocols and procedures
Capacity development is required through the continuous training in
communication techniques. Participants in this should include
policy makers, government officials, private sector and community
groups.
Integration of all types off media in charting communication
programmes – traditional, social media, community theatre, popular
entertainers etc.
David Smith questioned whether social media technology was more
robust than SMS, as social media required an IT hardware backbone
which might not be functional after an event.
26
The usefulness of cloud computing in supporting communications
needs in the event of a disaster was questioned.
The response was that cloud technology also required an IT
backbone, but the technology was useful in facilitating immediate
data replication.
Franklin McDonald observed that cellular technology was robust and
system failures were quickly corrected and had to be part of the
plan for any extreme emergency. The disaster management system had
to give priority to the restoration of communications systems,
particularly mobile system which had proved efficient in previous
disasters with limited breakdown. Congestion presented a problem
but many systems had the facility to strip away non-essential
people from the system, allowing only pre- selected emergency
facilities priority access to surviving band widths.
Professor Krimgold noted that in recent events in the USA there had
been extensive failure of cellular systems due to loss of power in
isolated cell towers. It was therefore critical to have an
independent power supply to remote cell towers.
Franklin McDonald noted that the standard for cell towers in
Jamaica was one level of redundancy and most had two. The issue in
Jamaica in extreme events was to reach the towers with fuel
supplies. He observed that there was an opportunity for local
regulatory bodies to set standards for the utilities in terms of
emergencies. For example the water authority in Jamaica was not
required to have back up energy facilities. Utility regulators
needed to document their expectations in terms of regular
assessments. They had vast powers were responsible for enforcing
seismic assessments.
A participant from Chile commented that there were no mobile phones
in use in the aftermath of the earthquake in Chile and it was
important to have several levels of plans for communication.
Franklin McDonald noted that while the mobile phone system has
tremendous potential and is categorized as an essential service in
Jamaica.
Viviene Davis-Campbell pointed out that there had been no mention
of the use of the amateur radio system or VHF radios which were
reliable systems when other means of communications failed.
Franklin McDonald acknowledged that VHF power could cover the
corporate area and should be used in event of system
failures.
Working Group Guidance Notes and Questions are given in the
Appendices.
CLOSING CEREMONY
The closing ceremony was chaired by Dr. Elsie Laurence-Chounoune,
Deputy Resident Representative, UNDP, who welcomed the Hon. Robert
Pickersgill, Minister of Water, Land, Environment and Climate
Change, Dr. Arun Kashyap, UN Resident Coordinator/UNDP Resident
Representative and Mr. Richard Thompson, Acting Director General of
ODPEM who would participate in the ceremony.
She observed that several good recommendations had been put forward
and the challenge would now be when and how the recommendations
were implemented.
Dr. Kashyap observed that the objectives of the forum, to
understand the risk facing Jamaica, had been accomplished as the
magnitude of risk and urgency of the action required had been
shared. Many good practices had been learnt from participating
countries regarding disaster management expertise and the
27
need for preparedness. It was also shared that being prepared meant
buildings capacity at human, institutional and system-wide level.
Partnership and support were necessary as no country of government
could accomplish without assistance.
He noted that the United Nations had practiced business continuity
planning for a long time and all agencies had BCPs. He underscored
the necessity of insurance in disaster recovery and highlighted the
commitment of all partners including government, citizens and
development partners.
The partnership among the UN, ODPEM and the Government demonstrated
the will and commitment to moving the process forward. The UN would
continue to bring in the best expertise and advice ensure there was
a strategy to mobilize the work, with the assistance of
international development partners, to build a system that was able
to meet the challenge when required.
Mr. Richard Thompson stated that the forum had facilitated a better
understanding of the work that had to be done in terms of seismic
preparedness. He thanked partners who had come in from overseas to
assist Jamaica in handling the common and shared scenarios. He
committed to taking the required action to achieve a state of
readiness in relation to seismic events.
Minister Pickersgill commended the UNDP and ODPEM for planning and
hosting this event. He observed that the earthquake was the most
feared natural hazard because of its unpredictability and
suddenness and its prediction was still elusive. It also came with
the threat of the tsunami, a more recent disaster.
The Minister referred to the exercise that had been carried out
simulate the impact the 1907 earthquake of a 6.5 magnitude on
modern Jamaica which revealed an estimated damage of over J$ 5.5
billion (approximately USD 55 million at today’s exchange rate).
Earthquakes had serious implications for planning and development
process – in fraction of a minute that earthquake occurs there are
millions in property loss, disruption of vital infrastructure. Most
urban centres, economic zones, population in vulnerable coastal
areas potential for widespread damage and loss of life
The Minister informed the forum that the Building Bill would give
teeth to sustainable development and ensure safety in the built
environment and the promotion of sustainable development.
He hoped that the forum had achieved its objective “to raise
awareness on the seismic risk to which Jamaica is exposed, and to
seek commitment and a general consensus at various levels on a
roadmap and plan of action for addressing seismic risk”. The
reduction of risk from natural hazards is crucial to the process of
process of making “Jamaica the place of choice, to live, work,
raise families and do business” which is the overarching Vision
2030 National Development Goal.
In closing Dr. Laurence-Chounoune observed that the objectives of
the forum had been met in a sensitized government ready to take
appropriate action; the engagement of key stakeholders in the
process; the establishment of South/South partnership and an aware
and mobilized population.
28
Key points arising from the forum were:
Preparedness is key to disaster prevention – the level of any
disaster is directly linked the
country’s ability to handle the event.
Preparation was a function of key partnerships. Internally
partnerships among government,
private sector, development partners, civil society, regulators and
the community. Externally, it
involved cooperation among countries with similar experiences in
information sharing and
relationships with international aid organizations.
Technical and scientific research was key to preparation in terms
of providing data to facilitate
effective development planning - tracking seismic activity,
microzonation mapping ‘ etc.
The necessity for consistently reviewing and improving early
warning systems.
Most deaths and damage in an earthquake resulted from collapsed
buildings, consequently, the
development of a proper building code and its enforcement was
integral to preparedness.
A comprehensive and cohesive national development plan that covered
all categories of natural
hazards, grounded in law, was necessary to effective preparation
and response. In guiding the
creation of policy and practices.
Ensuring the awareness and sensitization of the population to
seismic and other natural
hazards requires a continuous public education plan which should
include regular simulations
and evacuation drill. It is important to engage the youth in this
regard.
Preparation should take the need for alternative arrangements to
cover the eventuality of the
disruptions of critical services – health care, power generation,
transportation,
telecommunications, etc.
The importance of business continuity planning at all levels,
private and public sector, critical
infrastructure.
IMMEDIATE NEXT STEPS
1. All presentations and forum materials will be uploaded to the
ODPEM and UNDP websites and participants will be so advised.
2. An Outcome Document with a Roadmap for Seismic Risk Reduction
will be prepared, based on the information presented at the forum
and the discussions held. This document will be used to continue
building South-South Cooperation and Triangular Partnerships,
defining national priorities and developing regional
initiatives.
29
APPENDICES
Appendix 4 Opening Ceremony
Appendix 8 Closing ceremony