governance for sustainable reconstruction after disasters: lessons ...

4 downloads 327567 Views 1MB Size Report
In contrast, the 80% adobe and or non- engineered masonry building stock with poor lateral load resisting systems in. Iran collapses even for moderate levels of ...
In: Natural Resources Editors: S.A. Maillet, L.C. Valcourt

ISBN: 978-1-62948-185-2 © 2013 Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Chapter 5

GOVERNANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE RECONSTRUCTION AFTER DISASTERS: LESSONS FROM BAM Ivana Marino1, Giusy Lofrano2 and Maurizio Carotenuto3 1

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy 2 Department of Environment, Waste Divison, Salerno Province, Salerno, Italy 3 Department of Chemistry and Biology, University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy

ABSTRACT On 26 December 2003, a Mw 6.7 on Richter scale earthquake struck the city of Bam in southeastern Iran. The city lost over 40,000 inhabitants and the historic citadel of Arg-é Bam was destroyed, despite surviving numerous previous earthquakes during its 2000 year existence. Ten years later Bam is still waiting for reconstruction. The challenge of revitalizing Bam area passes through a green and safety reconstruction to improve the quality of life for communities and affected individuals whilst minimizing the negative impacts on the environment. The concept of green reconstruction has surfaced in the international arena as a successful strategy to deal with disasters, since it addresses the issue of

Complimentary Contributor Copy

156

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto sustainability during the recovery process. This chapter shows as sustainable reconstruction and environmental governance are closely connected in terms of addressing sustainability in a post-disaster scenario. Three main principles for sustainable reconstruction such as preserving the city identity in urban design, strengthening the new houses against the national building code, and householder participation in the process of rebuilding are also discussed. Moreover, it examines why it is crucial to consider governance issues in supporting sustainability during the reconstruction process. By using Bam as a specific case study, the chapter also provides a critical reflection on those governance gaps that have limited the implementation of sustainable reconstruction around the world. This chapter is an attempt to bring governance concerns into postdisaster safety reconstruction as a way to replace inappropriate catastrophe management and promote an alternative and more sustainable future.

Keywords: Arg-é Bam, Bam earthquake, environmental governance, sustainable reconstruction

1. INTRODUCTION Earthquakes have conditioned the development of urban settlements since the dawn of time. However, now as ever, disasters are the manifestation of the failure of development strategies. Catastrophic occurrences show to what extent the community which are exposed to natural events became even more susceptible and vulnerable when unsustainable development is pursued. Disasters strength the demand for systems of governance able to put society on a more sustainable track. The number of books, papers and conferences devoted to ―sustainable development‖ and ―governance‖ has grown enormously in the last decade. Therefore, in some ways it is hardly surprising as twenty years after the landmark Brundtland report, the world is still struggling to solve the riddle of sustainability (Jordan et al., 2008). In this sense, reconstruction after earthquake can be seen as an opportunity to address the shortcomings of the affected community. Reconstruction policies typically follow two different approaches: (i) to cover the losses of affected households or in other words reproduce the system of status quo ante; (ii) to change the previous system in favour of more sustainable development basing the help on the needs of the affected communities rather than their loss. Reconstruction is often considered as housing. One of the reasons for that, as Freeman (2004) believes, is that

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

157

governments benefit politically through this approach. Housing is the best way to show the allocation of money to cover people‘s need. But it should not be forgotten than disasters are evidences of inappropriate social decisions and cover a broader context that housing (Quarantelli, 1992). Therefore a sustainable reconstruction can only be achieved under certain conditions and primary governance issues need to be taken into account (Guarnacci, 2012). Environmental, technical, economic, social and institutional concerns have to be considered in each stage and activity of reconstruction to ensure the best long-term result, not only in housing design and construction activities, but also in the provision of related infrastructure such as water supply and sanitation systems (UNEP and SKAT, 2007). The concept of sustainable reconstruction seems to acknowledge the necessity of a dualistic approach: one that faces the challenges of a disaster response in the present while, and the other one that promotes a culture of prevention for the future (Guarnacci, 2012). According to United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR, 2009) the recovery task of rehabilitation and reconstruction which begins soon after the emergency phase has ended, should be based on pre-existing strategies and policies that facilitate clear institutional responsibilities for recovery action and enable public participation. Recovery programmes, coupled with the heightened public awareness, afford a valuable opportunity to develop and implement disaster risk reduction measures and to apply the ―build back better‖ principle. To face this challenge the international community asks for a ―sustainable governance‖ (ECFESD, 2000); sometimes it is for ―governance for sustainable development‖ (Ayre and Callway, 2005; Newig et al., 2008). Others have called for ―reflexive governance for sustainable development‖ (Voss et al., 2006). And still others have substituted the word ―sustainable‖ for other words to produce titles such as ―earth system governance‖ (Biermann, 2007) or ―global environmental governance‖ (Speth and Haas, 2006). What are we to make of these differences? Are they relatively small semantic matters or are they underlie by much more fundamental differences in approach, opinion, and, ultimately, human value? In their widely cited review article, van Kersbergen and van Waarden (2004) argued that there is not even a consensus on which set of phenomena can properly be grouped under the title of governance. To say that we are still in a period of creative disorder concerning governance (Kooiman, 2003) is almost certainly an understatement. In the last decade or so, issues of governing and governance have assumed a central place in contemporary debates in the environmental and social sciences (Pierre and Peters, 2000). According to de Alcantara

Complimentary Contributor Copy

158

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

(1998) the governance involves building consensus, or obtaining the consent or acquiescence necessary to carry out a programme, in an arena where many different interests are in play. While Tisdell and Roy (1998) argue the possibility for good governance depends on the appropriate institutional structure, the idea of de Alcantara (1998) is that institutions needed for implementing order and justice can be constructed through good governance. While great concern should be paid to keep the designed policies in accordance with the needs and circumstances of the affected region, the effectiveness and control of the implications of these policies should not be cared any less. To achieve this goal, local governments, NGOs and all the stakeholders, should be properly involved in a fruitful dialogue. Members of the affected community should be among the key decision makers of reconstruction plans, since it is them that are going to live in the new place. According to Schwab et al. (1998) planners should remember that the citizens of the area have a post-disaster plan in mind even before the planers begin their work. Contradictions between the prepared planned by officials and people‘s plan in mind would hinder the success of reconstruction. As Quarantelli (1982) rightly argues the realistic disaster planning requires that plans be adjusted to people and not that people be forced to adjust to plans. In many of the developing countries the concept of governance gives its place to government. In other words, the decision making in these countries are highly centralized. This fact results in failure in their development objectives, which reveals itself in form of disasters. One of the good examples of this process is the case of Bam, where a highly centralized governing system hindered the challenge of sustainable reconstruction. This paper shows as environmental governance is a key factor in terms of addressing sustainability in a post-disaster scenario. Three main principles for sustainable reconstruction: (i) preserving the city identity in urban design, (ii) strengthening the new houses against the national building code, and (iii) householder participation in the process of rebuilding are also discussed. Moreover, it examines why it is crucial to consider governance issues in supporting sustainability during the reconstruction process. By using Bam as a specific case study, the chapter intends to provide a critical reflection on those governance gaps that have limited the implementation of sustainable reconstruction around the world. This chapter is an attempt to bring governance concerns into post-disaster safety reconstruction as a way to replace inappropriate catastrophe management and promote an alternative and more sustainable future.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

159

2. EARTHQUAKE RISK MITIGATION POLICY Earthquakes remain one of the world‘s major problems. Worldwide, they occur frequently and often result in unacceptable life and economic losses. On average, every year, somewhere in the world there are more than 1,000 earthquakes of magnitude 5 on Richter scale (Mw 5) or greater, 100 Mw 6 or greater, 10 Mw 7 or greater, and 1 Mw 8 or greater earthquakes. During the decade 1990 - 1999, earthquakes resulted in loss of more than 115,000 lives (Figure 1) (USGS, 2013).

Figure 1. Worldwide earthquakes (1990 – 1999) (http://www.usgs.gov/).

Economic losses have also been catastrophic and particularly in highly developed countries. The Northridge earthquake (1994) was catastrophic, for example, not because of lives lost (approximately 60) but due to the economic loss which exceeded $40 billion, the affected region was overwhelmed, and interregional assistance was essential for recovery (EERI, 2003). Fatality rates are likely to continue to rise with increased population and urbanizations of global settlements especially in developing countries. More than 75% of earthquake-related human casualties are caused by the collapse of buildings or structures (Coburn and Spence, 2003). It is disheartening to note that large fractions of the world‘s population still reside in informal, poorlyconstructed and non-engineered dwellings which have high susceptibility to

Complimentary Contributor Copy

160

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

collapse during earthquakes. Moreover, with increasing urbanization half of world‘s population now lives in urban areas (United Nations, 2001) and half of these urban centres are located in earthquake-prone regions (Bilham, 2004). However, the poor performance of most building stocks during earthquakes remains a primary societal concern (Jaiswal et al., 2008). Because of the risk depends on hazard, vulnerability and exposure, the casualty estimation is based primarily on estimation of the ground shaking hazard, aggregating the population exposure within different building types, and estimating the casualties from the collapse of vulnerable buildings. Therefore, the contribution of building stock, its relative vulnerability, and distribution are vital components for determining the extent of casualties during an earthquake. It is evident from large deadly historical earthquakes that the distribution of vulnerable structures and their occupancy level during an earthquake influence the severity of human losses. In Iran, during the last 100 years, the total earthquake-related casualties from several individual earthquakes are dramatically higher than the causalities in California, though the number of strong earthquakes is comparable between the two countries. The relatively low casualties count in California is attributed mainly to the fact that more than 90% of the building stock is made of wood and is designed to withstand moderate to large earthquakes (Kircher et al., 2006). In contrast, the 80% adobe and or nonengineered masonry building stock with poor lateral load resisting systems in Iran collapses even for moderate levels of ground shaking. Consequently, the heavy death toll for the 2003 Bam, Iran earthquake (Gahfory et al., 2005) is directly attributable to such poorly resistant construction, and future events will produce comparable losses unless practices change. After conducting a brief survey of most lethal earthquakes in the world since 1960 Spence (2007) found that building collapses represent a major cause of earthquake mortality and unreinforced masonry buildings are one of the most vulnerable building stock throughout the world. Building inventory and vulnerability data are publicly available only for handful of countries or regions around the globe. Hence, it becomes clear that mapping out the extreme variations of the vulnerabilities in global building inventories is essential for both long-term earthquake loss mitigation and for rapidly identifying disasters. In fact, within the field of risk analysis, the detailed risk assessment is fundamental to the risk management. Making intelligent earthquake risk management choices need a science, engineering, societal approaches and the action plan for implementing the research findings is essential for bringing about the changes in earthquake risk

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

161

management that are essential for fostering more earthquake-resilient communities. The policy of mitigation risk runs into different parameters. First of all, the limited knowledge of earthquake hazards and their impacts bring to continue to design and to construct facilities without adequately understanding or mitigating the potential hazards. Moreover, the basic building codes are intended primarily to protect life safety as objective performance (FEMA356, 2000), rather than avoid socio-economic losses to the affected communities due to enormous consequences for the slowdown of production activities. Furthermore the public perception of risk plays a key role in risk analysis process, bringing issues of values, process, power, and trust (Slovic, 1999) at the heart of disagreements about the best course of action between technical experts and public government. The question is due to the multiple conceptions of risk: as a hazard, as a probability, as a consequence, as a potential adversity or threat. Therefore, the risk perceived by a politician is different from that perceived by a seismologist, or by an insurance company executive, or by a family living in an earthquake zone. Risk is also different to local and national governments involved with disaster management. So many different meanings often cause problems in communication that play an important role in policy of mitigation risk. For local and national public authorities policy makers, the community elements at risk include its structures, services, economic and social activities such as agriculture, commercial and service businesses, religious and professional associations and people. Risk is the expected losses to a community when a hazard event occurs, including lives lost, persons injured, property damaged and economic activities or livelihoods disrupted. The relationship of these elements can be expressed as a simple mathematical formula which illustrates the concept that the greater the potential occurrence of a hazard and the more vulnerable a system, also considering the number of exposed infrastructures, the greater is the risk. Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability x Exposure From the perception risk depends on the definition of what is the acceptable risk level for the investigated system, as the society. It is known that it is not sustainable from an economical point of view to achieve a null risk. The acceptable risk is focused, generally, on the reducing the losses caused by the natural events. The challenge is implementing mitigation risk sustainable policy so that the disasters are avoided. Mileti (1999) argues that disasters come out from design, that is, the result of the collective policies and

Complimentary Contributor Copy

162

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

decisions made by society in planning land use and construction of buildings and infrastructure. Accordingly to him, sustainability is the ability of a community to tolerate – and overcome – damage, diminished productivity, and reduced quality of life from an extreme event without significant outside assistance. In this context, acceptable risk, resilience and sustainability are levels of achievement to be defined and determined by each community. Specifically, it is necessary (Petak, 2002):     

to estimate the risk of an earthquake in terms of impacts to the community; to determine the ability of the built environment and human systems to withstand the events; to define the interventions that will lead to the desired level of community resilience; to develop collaborative mechanisms; to engage stakeholder participation in the policy adoption and implementation process.

3. CASE STUDY 3.1. Background 3.1.1. Iranian Seismic Exposition Iran is known to be one of most earthquake-prone countries. The Iranian plateau is part of the wider Eurasian plate, the tectonic setting of the region is due to the collision of the Arabian, Eurasian and Indian plates (Figure 2). The Arabian plate is moving northward colliding the Euroasian plate with an approximately 30 mm/year rate with deformation of the Earth‘s crust taking place across a broad bordau zone 1000 km wide, involving the whole region of Iran and extends into Turkmenistan in the Northeast of Iran (USGS, 2004). Convergent movement between the Eurasian and Arabian plates is accommodated by the Zagros ranges along the boundary of the colliding plates. This takes place in the form of rising mountains in conjunction with fault movements at depth within the earth. Because of the diffuse nature of this deformation (i.e. simultaneous movements along a number of sub-parallel faults over a wide area) the intensities of these tremors are generally low.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

163

Figure 2. Tectonic setting of the region.

A different seismic regime is seen in the interior parts of Iran. In the Central-East area strike-slip movements are the dominant deformation pattern. Differently to the Zagros Thrust zone, seismic activity associated with central Iranian faults is sporadic being much more localized and occurring with significantly higher magnitudes. Similar mechanisms are responsible for large magnitude earthquakes in other regions of the country (Ramezani, 2004). In particular, the three regions of Alborz, Khorasan, Kerman and the regions crossed through the Zagros Mountains are exposed to an high level of seismic risk. According to the historical records, several earthquakes occurred in Iran during the past: the Sirch-Hassan-abad 1877 earthquake (Mw 5.6 on the Richter scale), epicenter located at about 130km Northwest of Bam, destroyed many villages in Sirch, Abgarm and Hashtada, the Laleh Zar earthquake (1923) (Mw 6.7 on the Richter scale) killing 200 and the Golbaf earthquake (1949) (Mw 6.0 on the Richter scale) (BHRC, 2004). More recently, in 1981,

Complimentary Contributor Copy

164

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

two earthquakes struck the area. The Golbaf Earthquake (1981) (Mw 6.6) destroyed Golbaf City and its neighbours with 1100 deaths and more than 4000 injured, it produced a 15km surface rupture. Just one month later this earthquake was followed by the Sirch Earthquake (1981) (Mw 7.1), 65km of discontinuous surface ruptures, that destroyed Sirch and the surrounding villages causing approximately 1300 deaths. Another significant event in the area was the 1998 Fandoqa earthquake, with a magnitude of Mw 6.6 (Walker et al., 2002). One of the worst in the last decade, hit the ancient city of Bam, in south eastern Iran, approximately 1000km southeast of Tehran, on 26th December 2003 at 05:26:56 local time (01:56:56 GMT). The last one occurred in Khash on 16th April 2013, Mw 7.8 on Richter scale (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Historical and instrumental seismicity of the area.

3.1.2. Vulnerability of buildings in Iran Populated areas, concentrated on major cities in Iran, are mostly located on mountains slopes or plains. The distances between mountains peaks and the centres of these cities range from about 15 to 20 kilometres. Considering the different climatic and geographical conditions, a distribution map of population shows higher values of population densities in mountainous

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

165

regions, while south and central deserts present low population in densities. Figure 4a shows a distribution and density map of population in various parts of the country. Comparing the population distribution map in Figure 3a and the seismic macrozonation hazard map in Figure 4b, for different seismic zones, reveals that the majority of the country‘s population (83%) inhabits high and very high seismic hazard zones, as shown in Figure 5a. Previous post earthquake reconnaissance and statistical results reveal the very high seismic vulnerability of residential buildings in Iran. Based on data of building and housing section of Iran‘s statistical calendar and the 1996 census of Iran, there are 10,770,112 ordinary residential units in Iran: 14.8% are wood, concrete, and steel structures, and 85.2% units are built by brick, wood, stone, cement block, tile, and clay (1996 countrywide statistical results). The first group of structural typologies is supposed to be designed by considering the effect of seismic loads. However the rest of residential units have been constructed with brittle materials and therefore they have relatively low lateral resistance against seismic loads. This fact joints to the very high population density in the high and very high seismic hazard zones, made Iran one of the most seismic exposure countries in the world. Furthermore this conclusion is supported by the seismic vulnerability comparison showed in Figure 5b, where results of a statistical study based on the United States Geological Survey (USGS) earthquakes 1,000 or more deaths database, since 1900 are shown.

3.1.3. Bam Bam is located in an oasis area, the existence of which has been based on the use of underground water canals, qanāts, and has preserved evidence of the technological development in the building and maintenance of the qanāts over more than two millennia. The town is located in South of Iran, 193 km southeast of Kerman city, between the Jebalbarez and Kabudi Mountains and approximately 1,100 meters above sea level. Prior to the earthquake, Bam was one of the richest cities in Iran. Surrounded by deserts, Bam had a tradition of very successful agriculture, thanks to qanāts, producing more than 100,000 metric tons of the finest quality dates per year and a large amount of premium citrus fruits. It is estimated that 50% of the water for irrigation around Bam was delivered by 120 qanāts systems. Most of the people are engaged in agricultural activities. Dates and oranges are the most well-known agricultural products in Iran and date trees are scattered throughout the city. Bam residents believe that ―Bam is nothing without its date orchards‖. The residents value land ownership as part of their family heritage.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

166

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

a)

b) Figure 4. a) Distribution map of population in Iran (1996). b) Seismic macrozonation hazard map of Iran.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

167

Populations inhabit in each zones

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Low

Moderate

High

Very high

Seismic hazard zones

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2

n

ey

Ira

n

na

rk Tu

C hi

ly

pa Ja

a

Ita

di In

-E

cu

ad

an

le

iw Ta

ia

C ol

om bi a

C hi

ta

er Al g

is an Af gh

or

0 n

Number of earthquake with death more than 1000

a) 18

Country

b) Figure 5. a) Population distribution in seismic hazard zones of Iran. The populations inhabit in each zones are in millions of units. b) Seismic vulnerability of countries worldwide based on number of earthquakes in each country, each with 1,000 deaths or more (USGS, 2004). The vertical axis shows the number of earthquakes that have occurred in the corresponding country in each with fatalities numbering more than 1,000.

This means that land is not only a source of income but also a part of family identity and characteristic. As a result, many inhabitants consider land more important than housing. The modern town of Bam was also experiencing a rapid industrial growth before the 2003 earthquake. East of the city, a

Complimentary Contributor Copy

168

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

modern industrial complex assembled about 15% of automobiles produced in Iran each year (EERI, 2004). Finally the city also benefited from tourism, with an increasing number of people visiting the ancient Arg-é Bam citadel.

3.1.3.1. Geology of Bam Region The Bam area is part of the Lut-e-Zangi Ahmad desert having hot summers with temperatures over 50° C and winters with below zero temperatures. The geomorphology of the region also includes a range of mountains to the North of Bam extending northwest and the Jebal-e-Barez mountain range to the Southwest of Bam extending in a Northwest-Southeast direction. Geology of this region is dominated by lithologies varying from recent Quaternary alluvium to Eocene volcanic rocks (Hosseini, 2004). Bam, Baravat and surrounding areas are covered by coarse brown sandstone deposits. The northeast area of the Arg-é Bam is founded on tuff and traciandesite rocks, whereas remaining parts are built on alluvial deposits (BHRC, 2004). The thickness of alluvium in Bam varies between 0 and 30m. 3.3.1.2. History of town The town was originally founded during the Sassanian period (224637AD), only few of the surviving structures date before the 12th century, most of the ruins were built during the Safavid period (1502-1722), when the city extended for six square kilometres, and had between 9,000 and 13,000 inhabitants. Bam prospered because of pilgrims visiting its Zoroastrian fire temple (dating early to Sassanian times) and as a commercial and trading centre on the famous Silk Road. The town was largely abandoned due to an Afghan invasion in 1722, which overcame a weak Iranian government and ended Safavid rule. Successively, after the town had gradually been re-settled, in 1810, it was abandoned for a second time, due to an attack by invaders from Shiraz. Till 1932 Bam was used as an army barracks and then definitively abandoned. The ancient town covered an area of about 200,000 square meters and it incorporates three specific sections as shown in Figure 6. Arg-é Bam was made entirely by mud bricks, clay, straw and trunks of palm trees and it was surrounded by a rampart, consisting in 38 towers, and deep trenches representing an effective defensive barrier against possible attack. The first section was the largest one and consisted of residential buildings, shops and public places. The second section, surrounding by an inner wall, was the military section and provided a secure base and accommodation location for higher rank military personnel. The third section, located in a small hill in the north of the town, was put apart from the military section by another inner

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

169

wall. The latter was the official residence of the governor of the Arg. Figure 7 shows some views of the Arg-é Bam before the earthquake.

Figure 6. Model of the Arg-é Bam prior to the earthquake (Iranian Cultural Heritage Organization, ICHO).

3.3.1.3. Bam earthquake On 26th December 2003 at 05:26:56 local time (01:56:56 GMT) a devastating earthquake hit the town of Bam. According to USGS, the epicentre was located at 29.00N – 58.34E, about 185 km far from Kerman, very close to Bam (29.09N-58.35E) in particular close to the South of the town (Figure 8a). The focal depth of the earthquake is reported to be between 7km (BHRC, 2004) and 10km (EERI, 2004). Results of studies by Talebian et al. (2004) based on interferograms techniques, derived from coseismic satellite maps, suggest that the cause of the Bam earthquake was a blind strike-slip fault located about 5km far from the Bam fault visible surface traces. Figure 8b shows the macroseismic intensity distribution. A comparison of earthquake intensity and the population density, within 100 km radius from the epicentre, is also depicted. This intensity is shown based on European Macroseismic intensity Scale of 1998 (EMS-98) with a total affected population estimated to be 145,500 (Figure 8b). A pre-shock was recorded in Bam station about 53 minutes before the main shock. The pre-shock was sufficiently strong to

Complimentary Contributor Copy

170

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

suggest part of population, according to words of the survivors, precautionary measures by staying out of their homes.

a)

b) Figure 7. (Continued).

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

171

c)

d) Figure 7. Views of Arg-é Bam before earthquake. a) Citadel with a governor‘s residence and the main tower from the south wall ramparts; b) Stables and barracks of the citadel; c) One of the watchtowers of the citadel second wall; d) A view of Arg-é Bam from the citadel (Photos a, c and d photograph courtesy from sacredsites.com; photo b reproduced from http://www.ichodoc.ir/argebam).

Complimentary Contributor Copy

172

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

More than 60 aftershocks were recorded in the 6 days following the main shock. Bam digital instruments worked for 1 hour and 20 minutes after the earthquake, until running out of memory, recording nine aftershocks. The largest aftershock happened just one hour after the main earthquake; it was a Mw 5.3 seismic event.

a)

b) Figure 8. a) Epicentre of the earthquake. b) Macroseismic intensity and estimated affected population.

The earthquake was strongly felt in the Kerman region, about 190km (120 miles) Northwest of Bam, however main damage concerned a relatively small area near to Bam city, within a 20 – 30km radius. According to the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA, 2004) it caused

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

173

the deaths of approximately 43,200 residents and injured approximately 20,000. Some 75,600 people (14,730 house-holds) were displaced, 25,000 dwellings were razed and 24,000 dwellings were destroyed in the rural areas. The vast majority of buildings in the city collapsed and most of the remaining buildings were severely damaged as well as the main sources of income of the region through destroying irrigation tunnels. Up to 80% of the piped water system in places was destroyed. About 40% of the qanāts were damaged in the earthquake. Visible in the form of sinkholes, the failures were caused by the collapse of the shafts near the ground surface or the tunnel. Some of the old qanāts failed and caused foundation damage in buildings located close by (EERI, 2004). In terms of human cost, the Bam earthquake ranks as the worst disaster in Iranian history. Additionally the historic citadel of Arg-é Bam was completely destroyed (see Figure 9).

Figure 9. Aerial view of complete destruction of adobe dwellings in the Bam earthquake.

4. DISCUSSION At first, efforts were focused on saving lives and providing emergency services. Once the situation had stabilized, attention moved to broader interventions, to strengthen traumatized communities‘ cultural and social capacities, to cope with the disaster and to rebuild the infrastructures necessary

Complimentary Contributor Copy

174

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

to re-establish their livelihoods and their lives. The earthquake brought world attention on the wealth of that region‘s hydrogeological, archaeological and geo-historical culture, which had been well known to the ancient world but forgotten in the global rush towards modernity. Within days after the disaster a huge international relief effort was launched. Studies undertaken soon after the earthquake revealed thousands of hectares of archaeological remains; these had not been disinterred by the violent actions of the earthquake but had been scattered across the surface, abandoned for hundreds of years. On-going archaeological investigations reveal that the area is even more significant than had been believed when UNESCO was preparing the Bam dossier for submission to UNESCO‘s World Heritage Centre. Arg-é Bam was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List and on the World Heritage List in Danger as endangered, during the 28th Session of the World Heritage Committee, on the basis of the following criteria (ii), (iii), (iv) and (v): Criterion (ii): Arg-é Bam developed at the crossroads of important trade routes at the southern side of the Iranian high plateau, and it became an outstanding example of the interaction of the various influences. Criterion (iii): Arg-é Bam and its related sites represent a cultural landscape and an exceptional testimony to the development of a trading settlement in the desert environment of the Central Asian region. Criterion (iv): Arg-é Bam represents an outstanding example of a fortified settlement and citadel in the Central Asian region, based on the use mud layer technique (Chineh) combined with mud bricks (Khesht). Criterion (v): The cultural landscape of Bam is an outstanding representation of the interaction of man and nature in a desert environment, using the qanāts. The system is based on a strict social system with precise tasks and responsibilities, which have been maintained in use until the present, but has now become vulnerable to irreversible change. However the international focus on Bam faded almost as quickly as it started and to some extent it has become a forgotten disaster, overshadowed by the subsequent Indian Ocean tsunami and Pakistan earthquake disasters (UNICEF, 2007). Furthermore in 2011 Bam citadel has been the focus of an UNESCO investigation to evaluate its inscription in the World Heritage List, because of non-compliance with the standards related its reconstruction. The experts criticized the excessive construction activities in the area, including the building of a gas station and other several violations of UNESCO criteria.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

175

4.1. Structural Typologies and Its Weakness Most dominant structural systems in the Bam region were:  





Adobe buildings: built from adobe materials and unfired mud bricks. Most of these building had a vaulted roof system. Masonry buildings: the main load bearing system was built by fired bricks or concrete blockwork, it was normally combined with a jackarch roof system. Steel structures: constructions including frame structures with steel beams and columns and sometimes a braced framing system to resist the lateral loads. Reinforced concrete structures: a limited number of these structures existed in Bam mostly used for public buildings or government offices.

In the villages and surrounding countryside, adobe and masonry buildings were the main structural types. Building damage evaluation emphasized low lateral resistance of existing structures, as the major cause of the high level of structural damage due to earthquake. The few buildings whose performance was satisfactorily in the earthquake were recently designed and constructed, among these some steel structures with braced frame lateral load resisting systems. The dramatic scale of the casualties associated with a relatively small affected region underlines the need to foresee urgent measures to safeguard the increasingly urbanised population from the real risk posed by future earthquakes. The poor performance of traditional adobe houses during Iranian earthquakes is well documented. Many, if not most, of these buildings were disintegrated into heaps of dried mud brick rubble. The main weaknesses of the Bam area adobe residential constructions should be summarized as follow: 

  

lack of proper connections between the perpendicular walls, which resulted in the separation of walls from each other, failure of the walls, and subsequent collapse of the roof; lack of proper foundation and, in many cases, absence of foundations; heavy roof, causing an increase in the earthquake-induced inertia force on the building; addition of kahgel, straw-reinforced mud plaster for water proofing, every few years without removing the half-washed existing layer;

Complimentary Contributor Copy

176

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto   





poor quality of adobe units, being simply sun-dried local mud; poor quality of mortar, resulting in the lack of a proper bond between adobe units; weak bond in adobe masonry, including uneven layering of units and lack of proper overlap between layers, which causes vertical joints in two or more successive layers to coincide; the presence of a roof-induced horizontal force on top of the supporting walls in curved adobe roofs resulting in a gravity-induced outward force imposed on the walls; narrow and crooked alleys: narrow streets and alleys contribute in different ways to the extent of damage and the increase in the number of casualties in an earthquake. The narrowly spaced houses collapse on each other, resulting in secondary damage. It also makes the postearthquake search and rescue work more difficult.

So the performance of adobe houses during the Bam earthquake was disastrous, as neighbourhood after neighbourhood was reduced to rubble. The same modes of failure of the adobe buildings observed during the Bam earthquake were also observed in a number of other recent destructive Iranian earthquakes, such as the 1962 Buyin Zahra, 1968 Dashte Bayaz, 1978 Tabas, 1981 Sirch, and 1998 Golbaf earthquakes. Generally, semi-spherical adobe domes have shown better seismic performance than the vault type curved roofs and the flat wood-supported roofs. The resistance of the semispherical domes stems from their bi-directional load-bearing capacity and support system. Numerous surviving domes showed that as long as the supporting walls of the dome roof remained in place and intact, the roof also remained in place. However, similar to the case of cylindrical and flat roofs, the dome is not capable of binding the top of the walls, so the adobe walls supporting the dome are as susceptible to earthquake forces as the walls of the flat roofed buildings. In fact, compared with flat roofs, they have an added adverse effect of imposing pre-earthquake permanent outward thrusts on top of the walls. This horizontal thrust has forced the traditional builder to construct thicker, and therefore heavier, walls (see Figure 10a), which attract larger seismic forces. The out-of-plane failure of supporting walls was the main mode of failure of adobe houses during the Bam earthquake (Figure 10b). The out-of-plane failure is more predominant in walls with openings, partially due to in-plane damage preceding out-of-plane collapse.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

177

a)

b) Figure 10. Thick walls and out-of-plane failure of these walls are characteristics of curved roof adobe construction. The non-load-bearing end walls are the first elements to collapse in an earthquake.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

178

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

4.2. Beyond Initial Response: Low Coordination and Underestimation of Sustainability in Reconstruction Phase The interim recovery phase lasted at least a year when people were still living in tents and containers. The reconstruction phase started in February and March 2004, after the expiration of the 40 days period of official mourning whereas the Master Plan for the reconstruction of the city of Bam was completed in December 2004. Since the citadel and its cultural landscape were protected since 1945 under Iranian national legislation (Law of Conservation of National Monuments, 3 Nov. 1930), and, after the 2003 earthquake, the UNESCO has included the citadel in World Heritage List, the approach to mitigation risk management took into account the need to guarantee the preservation of all the key characteristics of the Citadel and the other architectural remains in the inscribed property. To maintain the authenticity and identity of the Arg-é Bam, it was assumed that interventions had to follow appropriate restoration principles and guidelines, in accordance to international charters, and in consideration to the original materials and techniques. However due to the strategy adopted by a highly centralized government: 

 

the number of international agencies present in Bam, which would have been fruitful involved in a sustainable reconstruction, reduced quickly; a number of international NGOs could not or did not want to function within the parameters set by the Iranian government; the lack of agreements at local level slowed down the project progress, producing financial blockages.

4.2.1. Local Knowledge The initial reconstruction plan was to shelter affected people in camps after emergency phase till their houses been built and people move to their new houses. The construction of campgrounds started as early as February 2004 (Khazai and Hausler, 2005). However, people were reluctant to move to the camps and gradually after the emergency period moved the tents (which were provided immediately after the disaster mostly by Iranian Red Crescent) to their own ruined houses. Consequently efforts were made to replace tents with prefabricated units on the site of the original plots of land. Camps became a waste of resources and the place of nonlocal or landless people with high rate of insecurity and lack of privacy.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

179

A project that turned out to be wholly inappropriate was the proposed introduction of eco-sanitary or twin indirect pit (TIP) latrines. The plan to pilot TIP was abandoned after it became clear that people were not interested in this idea. This type of system is used in India and other parts of Asia. When a pit is full, it is then composted to use for home gardens. In Iran not only is using human waste as compost culturally distasteful, but people have used chemical fertilisers for many years and this approach was simply out of tune with the context. Whilst there is always an argument for trying new approaches, this was simply inappropriate and ill conceived. Attitudes and practice can change following disasters – the way in which the government promoted family based care instead of residential care for separated and unaccompanied children is a case in point. Finally, the master plan for the reconstruction of Bam was not been released to the public and as a result people were not sure where they can build (toilet and shower blocks were traditionally in the yard, and so not being sure where the boundaries of the yard might be can hold people back from constructing) (UNICEF, 2007).

4.2.2. Community Engagement A few months after the earthquake, the reconstruction started with slogan of applying a ―participatory approach‖. However, due to the focus of the reconstruction of physical aspects, this approach failed to address major social problems of the society. As the transition to recovery period started, the role given to community would have to be strengthened. The community would have to be seen as ―agents‖ of development rather than ―recipients‖ of aid. Though the documents say that children and the community have an important role in designing and programming, they have not been consistently involved in the post-emergency work. The involvement of beneficiaries in programming and monitoring can help social integrity and counteract tendencies to community breakdown. 4.2.3. Water and Sanitation Water is currently being pumped out of the ground at over double the rate pre-earthquake due to a combination of leaks and increased usage for construction. The patched network remains fragile and there are areas on the periphery that still receive trucked water. It remains especially vulnerable to shocks and even without these there is a risk of parts of the network failing over time, and as attention shifts elsewhere the funds for repair being difficult to source. The current level of water usage in Bam is potentially unsustainable

Complimentary Contributor Copy

180

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

in the long term, as there is a risk it will deplete the aquifer. The same is true of the provision of latrines. After the earthquake it was a major issue for weeks as people did not have spaces to wash and toilets were in short supply. The risk of diarrhoea outbreaks increases in such circumstances further endangering children. The water companies operate with different models – the urban company is semi-autonomous (there are 70 in Iran), the rural company completely within the government structure. Both companies charge users and the urban company uses profits for routine maintenance. For both, capital investment (for instance the installation of a new network), comes directly from government through the Ministry of Energy and Power which all water companies come under. Before the earthquake, the city collected solid waste on a daily basis and disposed of it 20 miles (30km) southeast of the city at Rahim Abad. Because this is where the debris removed from the destroyed sites was taken, solid waste collection by the city was stopped after the earthquake.

4.2.4. Qanāts 300 qanāts are located at a distance of 2 to 11km from the Citadel. It is estimated that 50% of the water for irrigation around Bam was delivered by 120 qanāt systems. The oldest qanāt Fault One was located here from around 2.500 years ago (513 B.C). It is still going through archaeological digging and no conservation project has yet been developed. Furthermore the mill-qanāt was almost destroyed by the archaeological digging. About 40% of the qanāts were damaged in the earthquake, the failures were caused by the collapse of the shafts near the ground surface or the tunnel and produced foundation damage in buildings located close by. The shafts and qanāts need to be repaired and reinforced to prevent extinction of the palm farms, the very livelihood of the city. However until the present, they remain ―vulnerable to irreversible change‖.

4.3. Current and Future Adobe Rehabilitation Trends in Iran It is usually found that the urgent need for housing normally leads to large-scale reconstruction programmes, with huge demand for construction materials and limited considerations for environmental impact and poor living conditions for future residents (Peacock et al., 2007). However a sustainable reconstruction cannot disregard to preserve, so far as possible, the rural adobe construction because of its undeniable social, economic, and technical

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

181

advantages, including its architectural functionality and its suitability in environments with sharply changing temperatures. The challenge is to come up with simple and economical methods to improve the seismic safety of new and existing adobe construction. The first serious attempt to address the issue of adobe construction in Iran was the rehabilitation program carried out after the destructive Sirch earthquake in 1981 in the town of Golbaf. Following that earthquake, a number of housing complexes were constructed using different types of small, low-cost units. All units had either reinforced concrete or steel horizontal ring beams supported by vertical elements and most had precast reinforced concrete flat roofs. However, housing units of one specific complex had dome roofs of adobe brick supported by ring beams, as shown in Figure 11. Some load-bearing walls were also made of adobe bricks.

Figure 11. Excellent performance of ring beams in adobe houses during Golbaf earthquake of 1998.

In the 1998 event, only five people died due to the collapse of the remaining adobe buildings left from the previous event. None of the newly constructed units suffered major damage; the domes all stayed in place and no failure could be seen in the supporting walls. This experience highlights the fact that provision of some elements, in the form of ring beams to bind the walls together and provide a uniform support for the roof, can greatly enhance the seismic performance of adobe and unreinforced brick masonry buildings.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

182

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

Experienced approach can be used to reduce damage in future events, and the above mentioned requirements are incorporated into the Iranian code for adobe construction.

CONCLUSION Being Iran the most earthquake prone country in the world and having vulnerable cities due to the high rate of urbanization in poor lateral load resisting systems, the country is expected to face more disastrous earthquakes in the future. This fact increases the importance of reconstruction efforts to decrease vulnerabilities of the cities to future earthquakes and promote the sustainability as the only way to preserve identity of the sites and environment. Taking timely action to mitigate the impacts of potential hazards can transform a problematic future into one that is manageable. One way to illustrate the importance of risk reduction is to envision the results of successful risk reduction strategies. These results might include strategies for accomplishing institutional, technological, and community-based approaches such as legislation and policy initiatives, education and training in disaster prevention, engineering and technical solutions, preparedness and mitigation as well as the involvement and active participation of whole communities in disaster reduction, prevention and preparedness on an ongoing basis. A sustainable governance passes through: 

 

the development of a ―safety culture‖ in which people are aware of the hazards they face, assume a responsibility to protect themselves as fully as they can, and continuously support public and institutional efforts made to protect their community, the protection of historical and cultural sites identity, the sustainable development in which resource use aims to meet human needs while ensuring the sustainability of natural systems and the environment, so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

183

REFERENCES Ayre G. and Callway R. (Eds), 2005 Governance for Sustainable Development (Earthscan, London). BHRC, Building and Housing Research Centre, 2004, Quick preliminary report on Bam earthquake – 2 January 2004 (in Farsi). BHRC, Building and Housing Research Centre, 2004, The Urgent Preliminary report on Bam earthquake of Dec. 26, 2003, Iran. Biermann F., 2007, Earth system governance as a cross cutting theme of global change research. Global Environmental Change 17, 326 – 337. Bilham, R., 2004, Urban earthquake fatalities-a safer World or worse to come? Seismological Research Letters 75, 706 – 712. Coburn and R. Spence, 2003, Earthquake Protection. Journal of Seismology 7(4), 541 – 541. de Alcantara C.H., 1998, Use and abuse of the concept of governance. UNESCO. ECFESD, 2000, Sustainable Governance European Consultative Forum on the Environment and Sustainable Development (European Commission, Brussels) Eckersley. EERI, 2003, Securing society against catastrophic earthquakes losses, A research and outreach plan in earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. EERI, 2004, Preliminary observations on the Bam, Iran, Earthquake of December 26, 2003, Learning From Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Special Report. FEMA 356, 2000, Prestandard and Commentary for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings, Rep. no. FEMA-356, Prepared for the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) by the Applied Technology Council (ATC), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Washington D.C. Freeman P.K., 2004, Allocation of post-disaster reconstruction financing to housing, Building Research and Information 32(5), 427 – 437. Ghafory-Ashtiany, M., and Mousavi, R., 2005, History, geography, and economy of Bam, Earthquake Spectra 21(S1), S3 – S11. Guarnacci U., 2012 Governance for sustainable reconstruction after disasters: Lessons from Nias, Indonesia. Environmental Development 2, 73 – 85. Hosseini K.A., Mahdavifar M.R., Keshavarz Bakhshayesh M., Rakhshandeh M., ―Engineering Geology and Geotechnical Aspects of Bam Earthquake (Preliminary Report)‖, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Iran, Jan 2004.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

184

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

Iran Statistical Year Book, 2005, Statistical Center of Iran (http://www.s ci.org.ir), 1384, no. Dec 2007 Iranian Cultural Heritage Organisation, Internet site for Arg-é Bam, (in Farsi).Follow the link: http://www.ichodoc.ir/argebam (visited on July 2013). Jaiswal K.S., and Wald D.J., 2008, Creating a global building inventory for earthquake loss assessment and risk management: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008 – 1160, 103 p. Jordan A., 2008. The governance of sustainable development: taking stock and looking forwards. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 26, 17 – 33. Khazai B, Hausler E, 2005, Intermediate Shelters in Bam and Permanent Shelter Reconstruction in Villages Following the 2003 Bam, Iran, Earthquake, Earthquake Spectra 21(S1), 487 – 511. Kircher, C.A., Whitman, R.V., and Holmes, W.T., 2006, HAZUS Earthquake Loss Estimation Methods: Natural Hazards Review 7(2), 45 – 59. Kooiman J., 2003 Governing as Governance (Sage, London). Mileti, D. S., 1999. Disasters By Design, A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States, Washington D.C.: Joseph Henry Press, National Academy of Sciences; and Tierney, K. J., 1999. Toward a critical sociology of risk, Sociological Forum, 14, 215 – 242. Newig J.,Voss J-P., Monstadt J. (Eds), 2008. Governance for Sustainable Development: Steering in Contexts of Ambivalence, Uncertainty and Power (Routledge, London). OCHA, Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, 2004. Situation Report, February 9th. United Nation. Peacock W.G., Dash N., Zhang Y., 2007. Sheltering and housing recovery following disaster. In: Rodriguez, H., Quarantelli, E.L., Dynes, R.R. (Eds.), Handbook of Disaster Research. Springer, London, pp. 258 – 274. Petak W., 2002, Earthquake Resilience through Mitigation: A System Approach, paper presented at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria. Pierre J. and Peters B., 2000, Governance, Politics and the State (Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hants). Quarantelli E.L., 1992, The Importance of Thinking of Disasters as Social Phenomena, Disaster Research Center University of Delware, Preliminary Papers 184. Quarantelli E.L., 1982, General and Particular observations on Sheltering and Housing in American Disasters, Disasters 6(3), 202 – 206.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

Governance for Sustainable Reconstruction after Disasters

185

Ramezani J., Earthquakes in Iran: A Geological Perspective. Follow the link: http://freethoughts.org/archives/000389. Schwab J, Topping K, Eadie C, Deyle R, Smith R, 1998, Planning for Postdisaster Recovery and Reconstruction, American Planning Association. Slovic, P., 1999, Trust, emotion, sex, politics, and science: Surveying the riskassessment battlefield. Risk Analysis, 19(4), 689 – 701. Originally published in M. H. Bazerman, D. M. Messick, A. E. Tenbrunsel, & K. A. Wade-Benzoni (Eds.), Environment, ethics, and behaviour (pp. 277 – 313). San Francisco: New Lexington, 1997. Revised version in The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1997, pp. 59 – 99. Spence, R., 2007, Saving lives in earthquakes: successes and failures in seismic protection since 1960. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 5, 139 – 251. Speth J. and Haas P., 2006, Global Environmental Governance (Island Press,Washington, DC). Talebian M., Fielding E.J., Funning G.J., Ghorashi M., Jackson J., Nazari H., Parsons B., Priestley K., Rosen A., Walker R., Wright Tim J., 2004, ―The 2003 Bam (Iran) earthquake: Rupture of a blind strike-slip fault‖, Geophysical Research Letters, 31, L11611. Walker, R. and Jackson, J., 2002, Offset and evolution of the Gowk fault, S.E. Iran: A major intracontinental strike-slip system‖, Journal of Structural Geology 24, 1677 – 1698. UNESCO, http://whc.unesco.org (visited on July 2013). UNICEF, 2007, Iran Bam Emergency programme 2003 – 2006. Final report. United Nations Environment Programme — UNEP, Swiss Resource Centre and Consultancies for Development—SKAT, 2007. After the Tsunami. Sustainable Buildings Guidelines for South East Asia. /http://www. skat.ch/activities/prarticle.2005-09-20.1264594682/ skatactivity.2006-1009.2300065102/prarticleblockfile.2008-02-25.2351 566031/fileS United Nations, 2001, Compendium of Human Settlements Statistics 2001: United Nations, New York, 246 p. USGS, 2013, U.S. Geological Survey, http://www.usgs.gov/ USGS, U.S., Geological Survey, ―Preliminary earthquake report, Magnitude 6.6 southeasten Iran, 2003 December 26‖, National Earthquake Information Center, World Data Center for Seismology, Denver, Feb 2004. USGS EERI, 2004, ―Preliminary observations on the Bam, Iran, Earthquake of December.

Complimentary Contributor Copy

186

Ivana Marino, Giusy Lofrano and Maurizio Carotenuto

Voss J-P, Bauknecht D, Kemp R (Eds), 2006, Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Glos). van Kersbergen K., vanWaarden F., 2004, ‗Governance‘ as a bridge between disciplines, European Journal of Political Research 43, 143 – 171.

Complimentary Contributor Copy