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