Japanese Design, Earthquakes, Probability and Nepal

Living in an active seismic zone is difficult, sometimes you awaken just when the midnight bell tolls or in the middle of putting paste to your toothbrush. Crazy yes! Unlucky, probably less so. Not the least because during these instances you are actually lucky enough to be in your own home, which you will tend to trust that tad bit more while the ground rattles.

God Forbid, you’re stuck in the office or any other building whose structural integrity you may question when the columns start to move; And make no mistake, we have all had that extra dose of fear, even as recently as 2015.  2015 was a truly mind wrecking experience and will mostly probably repeat itself with that extra layer of uncertainty unless something changes drastically in Nepal.

Following the catastrophic Gorkha Earthquake of 2015, It was widely believed that the aftermath would prompt calculated initiatives from the government with a renewed focus on more safer buildings and the introduction of safer building codes. While, this has been partially true with stringent guidelines for new buildings being put in place which has led to the construction of sturdier and robust buildings the same cannot be said about older buildings that survived the previous earthquake but in all probability may not survive the next big one.

Then again, according to our history the next big one is probably 50+ years away, and we have got plenty of time before taking actual action. Just like when if you flip a coin 10 times and get 10 heads consecutively, the probability of getting tails in the next coin toss will be greater than that of getting a head! Right…

In actuality, the probability of getting a tail even in the 11^th toss is actually still 50% as in this case all the coin tosses are mutually exclusive. Setting the jargon aside it is this linear thinking and misunderstandings about the nature of probability that have everyone convinced that old buildings don’t need introspection as we probably won’t see another major quake in our lifetimes.  

Nevertheless, even barring the fear of another big earthquake, it is clear that while newer codes have made new buildings safe, no action has been forthcoming for existing ones. Just remembers those old houses in inner parts of the city such as new road which are still supported by “टेका”. Then there are also buildings built pre earthquake with weaker foundations and geometrically obscene designs that challenge laws of stability not to mention those buildings which have been built beyond permitted heights and floors.

In reality, while the Gorkha earthquake mandated a proper review of all building infrastructure, the actual response was highly reactive; and a proper thorough review of building structure and safety is still pending.

Contrast this to Japan, where even temples that existed a millennia ago exhibit earthquake proof designs that lay the groundwork for earthquake proofing technology used today. From using wood as a more flexible building material resistant to earthquake as opposed to brick or stone, the building of wooden structures without the need for nails and the concept of a adjustable foundation that reacts to and cancels certain tremors: the precursor to dampers of today, all show a nation that understands its geography and how to keep its people safe.

Buildings built in line to very stringent building codes, cities designed for proper space usage and safety, extending to dedicated human power for tasks such as assessing and adjusting the nature of concrete to be put in the foundations and supports of buildings,  the attention to detail is almost unmatched the world over. And this has been so for centuries way before this modern version of Japan took Shape and that is why even though Japan experiences tens of thousands of earthquakes each year, the fatality rate in the nation is very low.

So, what next then, should Nepal try and emulate Japan? Not exactly.

With a different culture, geography, and exposure to earthquakes, Nepal has been built in a haphazard manner and will certainly require an approach that can cater for the uncertainty. The solution is to initially draft a more comprehensive building and urban design policy and put earthquake mitigation as one of the key tenets of building requirements more so than ever. In this scenario,  the current policy with a more stringent regulatory framework might set the foundations. Similarly, periodic tests for building safety and structural integrity akin to vehicle pollution tests but spread over a much longer timeframe maybe implemented to identify vulnerable buildings that might require proactive retrofitting. Also, violations of building permissions for building of new structure beyond approved designs needs to be strictly monitored and dealt with.

Finally, the government needs to take immediate action to facilitate either the retrofitting or demolition of old structurally weak buildings in the core city either by providing adequate financial remuneration or through subsidized loans and grants to facilitate better construction. The safety hazard posed to the general populace by these buildings is too great to ignore.

Nonetheless, whatever the action be, one thing is certain, we cannot always rely on lord Pashupatinath to bail us out of every trouble like in 2015 when the fatality rate was far below previous projections. The government needs to be robust and proactive for once in its actions that we may one day be able to rely on it…