As Nepal struggles to come to grips with the aftermath of last week's earthquake and its many aftershocks, questions are once again being raised about the safety of buildings and the practice of unauthorized construction in some Asian countries. More people have been killed by earthquakes in Asia in the past century than in all previous years put together, says a paper published in the British journal Science, and the reason is the "fragility of construction methods" used there. More than one-quarter of the world's population lives in south-central Asia — in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Myanmar. Unfortunately, buildings continue to be poorly constructed and unreinforced in all these countries. Earthquake-resistant design codes are often only applied to civic structures, ignoring dwellings. In many of these countries, contractors often fail to adhere to building codes. This is one reason why the “spontaneous collapse” of multistory structures is becoming all too frequent in South Asia's major cities. Earthquakes are much, much deadlier in such places. By now we have the technology to reduce earthquake deaths. In vulnerable regions like California, Japan and Chile, authorities have taken steps to modernize building codes and dramatically reduce risks. But poorly-built buildings persist in many disaster-prone regions of the world where dwellings continue to be shoddily constructed and topple easily in earthquakes, even though authorities know that big quakes are inevitable. After the 1995 Kobe earthquake, Japan, which has some of the world's most stringent building codes, put enormous resources into retrofitting the country's older and more vulnerable structures. Following a 9.5-magnitude earthquake in 1960, Chile embarked on a massive earthquake-safety program and enforced new building codes. Of course, we cannot expect underdeveloped or developing countries to spend huge sums of money on projects designed to prevent disasters which may or may not happen. This is especially the case when authorities are lulled into a false sense of complacency by a lack of seismic activity. Secondly, it's very difficult to build good hospitals, schools and apartment buildings at a rate that would keep pace with the rapid growth in population. Moreover, in countries such as Nepal where civil unrest or extreme poverty in the countryside force people to move to cities, new buildings are often hastily built. Unfortunately, funding alone is not the problem. In some areas, the barrier appears to be psychological — fatalism or a feeling that there is not much that communities or governments can do in the face of nature's fury. A much bigger problem is corruption and weak governance. Offers of money or other incentives can make officials turn a blind eye to the flagrant violation of building codes. One would hope the Nepal tragedy would force governments to enforce existing construction codes. This is especially necessary in countries like India where buildings fall even without earthquakes. Improved estimates of seismic risk are a must but they will be of no use if authorities permit unauthorized and unsound construction practices to continue. Governments need to strengthen their buildings and concrete structures once it becomes clear an earthquake, big or small, is almost inevitable. Experts say the Himalayan region between India and Nepal experiences a magnitude 8 earthquake approximately every 75 years. Earthquake and tsunami drills are routine for every Japanese citizen. Earthquake-prone countries need to do something along these lines even though they may not be in a position to undertake such activities on a scale as large as Japan's. The rising death toll from earthquakes and other natural disasters shows that too many countries have been slow to take the necessary steps to prepare for such calamities. They must shed their lethargy and start preparing for a natural disaster before the tragedy occurs.
